[GO] Split Adjacent Forts

[greenoaks]

Improve Adjacent Forts


Concise description:

• Allow multiple forts from 1 terit to any and all adjacent territories

Specifics/Details:

• Instead of forting all troops from 1 terit to another you could fort some to the one on the left and some to the one on the right
• If all troops are moved from that terit (in 1 or more goes) the message/button 'You can make no more Fortifications' appears for you to click and end your turn
• If you do not wish to move all troops, fort those you want to move to 1 or more adjacent territories then select 'End Forts' like you do now for Unlimited

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• Similar to the sug by VS called Shotgun Reinforcements however it would be an improvement to an existing option, not an additional one
• It would reinvigorate Adjacent Fortifications, increasing the demand to play it instead of Chained or Unlimited
• It would increase the movement of troops in team games as stacks can be split and reformed with greater ease

[chapcrap]

Kind of interesting... If you were going to do this for adjacent, why not for chained too?

[greenoaks]

Kind of interesting... If you were going to do this for adjacent, why not for chained too?

although it could very well apply to that, chained is already a very popular setting.

this is about generating interest in an underused setting.

[chapcrap]

Yeah, I understand the goal. I'm just thinking confusion will arise about chained and adjacent being setup differently.

[Funkyterrance]

I am actually a big fan of adjacent. I wouldn't mind this option as long as I could still have the old fashioned adjacent option too. But who knows, over time I might end up liking this version better, it has some attractive possibilities. I'm sure it would make for longer games, however and adjacent can be long to begin with.

[greenoaks]

a quick search of active games shows Chained with 11,687; Unlimited with 4,932 and Adjacent with only 1,939 active games.

[agentcom]

Your point being that adjacent is under-played? I'm not sure that almost 2,000 active games proves that point. There are 3222 1v1 standard games and "only" 685 quads games. Does that mean we should change how quads works? No. It's just another game option.

[The Voice]

As an additional option, I'm all for it. Needless to say I'm a fan of the current adjacent, however, being that 42% of my nearly 4,000 games played have been on adjacent.

[DoomYoshi]

Adjacent is the game, chained is some kind of freakshow.

[rishaed]

Kind of interesting... If you were going to do this for adjacent, why not for chained too?

Because then it would be more than like Unlimited. Unless I accidently for the wrong number of troops from an area I will only be using 1 reinforcement from that area.

[rishaed]

Sry i misunderstood the OP . However I do think that it is a good suggestion.

[Eddygp]

I like adjacent, fog and trench games, being the most similar to real life settings. I do not know if this idea would be interesting, but I would give it some tries, and, who knows, it might be quite interesting. So I support it as an extra game setting, but not to replace current adjacent option.

[Funkyterrance]

I like adjacent, fog and trench games, being the most similar to real life settings. I do not know if this idea would be interesting, but I would give it some tries, and, who knows, it might be quite interesting. So I support it as an extra game setting, but not to replace current adjacent option.

I would think that this suggestion is probably the closest to real life if you are going to look at it that way. In real life you can fort adjacently on all of your lines, not just one.

[Swifte]

I like adjacent, fog and trench games, being the most similar to real life settings. I do not know if this idea would be interesting, but I would give it some tries, and, who knows, it might be quite interesting. So I support it as an extra game setting, but not to replace current adjacent option.

I would think that this suggestion is probably the closest to real life if you are going to look at it that way. In real life you can fort adjacently on all of your lines, not just one.

How do you mean 'in real life'. Like... in a war? or the game of Risk? because here are the rules of Risk i'm familiar with:

FORTIFYING YOUR POSITION

To fortify your position, move as many armies as you’d like from one (and only one) of your territories into one (and only one) of your adjacent territories. Remember to move troops towards borders where they can help in an attack! In moving your armies from one territory to another, you must leave at least one army behind.

[Funkyterrance]

I like adjacent, fog and trench games, being the most similar to real life settings. I do not know if this idea would be interesting, but I would give it some tries, and, who knows, it might be quite interesting. So I support it as an extra game setting, but not to replace current adjacent option.

I would think that this suggestion is probably the closest to real life if you are going to look at it that way. In real life you can fort adjacently on all of your lines, not just one.

How do you mean 'in real life'. Like... in a war? or the game of Risk? because here are the rules of Risk i'm familiar with:

FORTIFYING YOUR POSITION

To fortify your position, move as many armies as you’d like from one (and only one) of your territories into one (and only one) of your adjacent territories. Remember to move troops towards borders where they can help in an attack! In moving your armies from one territory to another, you must leave at least one army behind.

Lol yeah I thought he was referring to real as in war. I didn't consider that he might have meant the board game.