Forum

by **-=- Tanarri -=-** on Fri Mar 11, 2011 1:47 pm

TaCktiX wrote:
ender516 wrote:That could be important in games with losing conditions.

By george you're right. R&C will be absolutely retarded in Nuclear, as people can nuke away researches.

I never thought about that. Heck, nevermind researches, people could just nuke the one capital someone owns in a 4-6 player game. I think unnukable territories would be a really good thing, but I doubt it's gonna be implemented in time for R&C. Hopefully it'll be around once the second R&C map is made, presuming it gets done.

by **MrBenn** on Fri Mar 11, 2011 1:51 pm

nukes add a bit of variety to maps with losing conditions, that's for sure... I was playing a doubles nukes game with nobodies80 on Middle Ages, and had some very fortuitous cards while on a cashing-in extravaganza (which normally only happen in escalating)!

by **natty dread** on Fri Mar 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Perhaps lack should just plain add a rule in the game engine that territories that are part of losing conditions don't get given out as cards in nuclear games...

by **Riskismy** on Fri Mar 11, 2011 4:30 pm

natty_dread wrote:Perhaps lack should just plain add a rule in the game engine that territories that are part of losing conditions don't get given out as cards in nuclear games...

Sounds like an easy fix. Got my vote.

by **Victor Sullivan** on Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:16 pm

Suggestion: Neutral-Connected Bonus

Description: Basically, receive a bonus of X if Territory Y is neutral.

Why It Should Be Considered: Firstly, I thought of it to be a way of getting players to move outside of potentially "comfortable" starting positions. For example, the other players' bonuses could be connected to the territory (we'll call this "Territory W") just outside of your "comfort zone". Such as, if Territory W is neutral, than your opponents' bonuses are active.

In addition, this adds a fantastic ability to killer neutrals. Suppose Territory Z is killer neutral, and suppose your bonus is dependent on Territory Z's being neutral. An opponent can sweep in and take the neutral to break you - but only for a turn. This might be nice for easily defensible coastal bonus areas - have a connected (relatively high) killer neutral in the center.

I realize this is a rather odd suggestion but I nonetheless think it would be a great asset and open up many doors in CC mapmaking.

by **random num2** on Fri Apr 08, 2011 6:01 pm

Perhaps we could create even more interesting maps by adding a possible "Defense bonus" tag to the territory. Theoretically, the territory would have a defense bonus due to natural defenses or height.
Just an idea.

by **theBastard** on Mon Jul 11, 2011 5:32 pm

nothing new, it was in debate here, but how it looks with conditional autodeploys? this could be something what can balance gameplay - we have much conditions for manual deploy (also negative) but no one for autodeploy.

by **-=- Tanarri -=-** on Mon Jul 11, 2011 9:23 pm

I'm not sure if conditional autodeploys are going to be part of the new XML updates that are coming as the next site update. I hope they are, as they would add a lot to the site and should be easy enough to code in. If they're not part of the XML update this time around, then I wouldnt' hold your breath as based on current track records it may be another 2-3 years before they have another shot at making it in.

I have hopes that all of the long awaited basic features that have been discussed for a while (Conditional AutoDeploys, Decay to Neutral, and the fog ones being the main ones with conditional borders being a hopeful) will be implemented, but I don't know that any of them will be for sure.

by **MrBenn** on Tue Jul 12, 2011 2:37 am

Abandon all hope ye who enter here...

by **ender516** on Tue Jul 12, 2011 11:57 am

Gee, he takes off the blue suede shoes and he gets all cynical.

by **TaCktiX** on Wed Jul 13, 2011 3:46 am

It's a cynicism born of long experience, the worst kind.

by **OliverFA** on Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:42 pm

Maybe we can abandon hope... just to look for A New Hope

by **zimmah** on Thu Jul 28, 2011 2:28 pm

MrBenn wrote:Abandon all hope ye who enter here...

there's so many great suggestions here. but don't think most of them will ever get updated into the website, unfortunatly.

a few years ago at least SOME updates got through.

by **OliverFA** on Thu Jul 28, 2011 6:00 pm

zimmah wrote:
MrBenn wrote:Abandon all hope ye who enter here...

there's so many great suggestions here. but don't think most of them will ever get updated into the website, unfortunatly.

a few years ago at least SOME updates got through.

As I just said in the Research & Conquer thread... I have Hope that some important investor will bring a lot of cash to CC so the site can hire a legion of web programmers. Why not? could happen!

by **DiM** on Thu Jul 28, 2011 6:45 pm

OliverFA wrote:
zimmah wrote:
MrBenn wrote:Abandon all hope ye who enter here...

there's so many great suggestions here. but don't think most of them will ever get updated into the website, unfortunatly.

a few years ago at least SOME updates got through.

As I just said in the Research & Conquer thread... I have Hope that some important investor will bring a lot of cash to CC so the site can hire a legion of web programmers. Why not? could happen!

look there. over there... it's a pig. and it's flying!!! :mrgreen: