Conquer Club

That's a terrible idea. And it's not Risk.

eclecto wrote: No more chance, more like Diplomacy or chess. Well I take that back there is always the probalistic element of the cards and drop.

Probably only suitable for multiplayer games.

Don't forget the issue of who starts. Imagine if could play a two player game like this: any territory could be conquered with a 3 and a 4. So any territory of theirs adjacent to two of yours could be taken in the first round. You'd be able to conquer one for each army you deploy. So after one turn, you'd have 1/3 more than you started with, and they'd have 1/3 less. Definitely only suitable for multiplayer games.

In real war there are "unusual" things that happen. If you were to compare it to dice, it would be like attacking with 5 against 100 and winning with only losing 3. It makes this game more interesting, because you constantly have to think of new strategies as your luck fails you in certain areas. If it's just set how it is, then whoever can get more troops wins. There is no lucky or unlucky battles over the map.

Then people will complain about 1 person starting with a territory set already and winning the game due to receiving more troops. They will complain about the cards, whoever gets the mixed set first will win for sure.

Example of some real life examples which would compare to "unlucky" or "lucky" rolls:

Pearl Harbor:
"The attack sank four U.S. Navy battleships (two of which were raised and returned to service late in the war) and damaged four more. The Japanese also sank or damaged three cruisers, three destroyers, and one minelayer, destroyed 188 aircraft, and caused personnel losses of 2,402 killed and 1,282 wounded."
"Japanese losses were minimal, at 29 aircraft and four midget submarines, with 65 servicemen killed or wounded."

Moved to Sugs & Bugs and merged with the existing topic.

4myGod wrote:Pearl Harbor:
"The attack sank four U.S. Navy battleships (two of which were raised and returned to service late in the war) and damaged four more. The Japanese also sank or damaged three cruisers, three destroyers, and one minelayer, destroyed 188 aircraft, and caused personnel losses of 2,402 killed and 1,282 wounded."
"Japanese losses were minimal, at 29 aircraft and four midget submarines, with 65 servicemen killed or wounded."

That's because it was 1v1, they dropped Kates, Vals, and Zeroes, and went first. Of course you're going to win in that situation

Dice here are...
30/70 autoasalt = attacker had 7 left !!!
25/3 I had 7 left (regular attack)
6/1/1 lost all took one
and so on
We all had them, or at least we all should have had them!!

Where is the skill when you lose 11/3 with 1/3, and then player after you gets 37/30 left 30 and then takes 10 more turfs ending with 15/5 which he takes with 14 left!!!

NO DICE OR CHANGE THE SCRIPT FOR THEM!!!

No autoasalt and random each dice separately!!! Not all dice at once like now!!!

Concise description:

• ok, have u ever experienced so bad dice you want to tear the computer apart? well, how about a completely new game type where the armies to advance are subtracted from the opposing armies-defending. for example, "a" has 9 troops, "b" has 6 troops, "a" assaults "b" and advances 3 troops, that way bad dice(and unfortunately good dice) is eliminated. Of course, this, as i am suggesting, will be just a different game mode and option when starting again, the nomal dice game will still be there(that is if this idea is implemented)

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• No bad dice
• players can be more confident about their assaults

Concise description:

• ok, have u ever experienced so bad dice you want to tear the computer apart? well, how about a completely new game type where the armies to advance are subtracted from the opposing armies-defending. for example, "a" has 9 troops, "b" has 6 troops, "a" assaults "b" and advances 3 troops, that way bad dice(and unfortunately good dice) is eliminated. Of course, this, as i am suggesting, will be just a different game mode and option when starting again, the nomal dice game will still be there(that is if this idea is implemented)

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• No bad dice
• players can be more confident about their assaults

Firstly, one thread about the subject is more than enough...

Secondly, do a search ffs. No dice games has been suggested before (recently even), find the thread and read-up/continue there.

ok...right, you say that everytime

This was discussed and ignored on this thread:

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... hilit=dice

Is this a duplicate thread? you seem to have created 2 of the exact same down to the letter.

link

jleonnn wrote:ok...right, you say that everytime

Well the thread was last up 6 weeks or so ago and if you search for "no dice" you find the old thread within the 10 first results. Not that hard I'd say...

No dice at all would suck. But we could limit the dice's influences in such a game type. For example give it a 20% chance on a double win, a 20% on a double loss and a 60% on an equal hit. That would make it more equal than the curernt dice

But where would CC be without it's regular revisiting of the dice issue?

I quite like the idea as i've suggested something vaguely similar in the past (guaranteed minimum damage, but with some dice element in my one). However, the forums are just for venting dice moans, ideas aren't actually picked up and acted on or anything

people will complain even then... further, if dice were not a factor, theyd complain about the drops not being random

This is a game based on dice, and made fun BECAUSE of the possibilites. If a 4 couldnt occasionally kill a 12, it would not be a fun game. And, not any more realisitc, because in real life, certainly 4 divisions, 4 platoons, or 4 men, can certainly defeat 12 grops of the same size... thats the point of the randomness.

Chess gives you the same odds every time...this does not, and never will...and therefore is an nice cross between poker and chess.

AAFitz wrote:
Chess gives you the same odds every time...this does not, and never will...and therefore is an nice cross between poker and chess.

I am interested how you come to that conclusion. This game seems far more like poker than chess.

well... I stink at chess

I can see where your going but it will take out the risk from a game and will make games predictable.

.....
Terrible.

Kotaro wrote:.....
Terrible.

Be nice it's not terrible it's just fundamentally flawed.

brutalsleeper wrote:

Kotaro wrote:.....
Terrible.

Be nice it's not terrible it's just fundamentally flawed.

In a game like that, there will be millions of games that never end, because all you can do is suicide, because you're both evenly matched.

My objection would be that it takes all the strategy out of the game. everyone will be doing the exact same thing and everyone will just BFI (brute force and ingnorance) their way through anything.

Geez, could a mod lock this already?

Or possibly merge with his other duplicate thread (that people started responding to). Or even merge it with the older "No Dice" threads (links in the duplicate thread IIRC).

Concise description:

• Create a game type in which dice do not affect it.

Specifics:

• When attacking a 4 for instance.. the player will lose 4 armies.. attacking a 2, the player loses 2.. etc etc

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• Make People that complain about dice ( including myself ), not have that opportunity
• Really show the strategic skill of the players
• Add a fun new setting for players to be able to enjoy

Im not sure how much different coding and what not this would require from the big man, and whether or not it would be feasable.. feedback would be nice