Adjacent Attacks

[n00blet]

Man.........I'd given up on getting support for this in June!
But hey, I appreciate the support ...maybe people will pay more attention to it now.

I know you say just 1 attack per contry. but i think it will be a slow game. so let the samme contry attack all its borders..

What you are referring to is the original suggestion. If you read down on the first post of this topic, you would see that that concern of yours has been dealt with, as the suggestion is simply:

Newly conquered countries cannot attack for the duration of the turn they are conquered on.

So, all countries would be able to attack all bordering countries in the same turn. However, countries that were only gained in that turn would not be able to attack anything until the next turn.
Example:
Country A only borders Country B and Country C
Country B only borders Country D and Country E
Country C only borders Country F and Country G

Player 1 owns Countries A and B. They start their turn, and deploy on those two countries.
Player 1 then attacks and conquers Country C from Country A, and advances all of his armies. However, Country C cannot attack Countries F and G until the next turn.
Player 1 then attacks and conquers Country D from Country B. Player 1 decides to advance only half of his armies (which are now inactive for the rest of the turn)
Player 1 then attacks and conquers Country E from Country B, and then advances all remaining armies (which are also inactive for the rest of the turn)

I hope that example makes the parameters of my suggestion clear, if they were not already.

[Androidz]

Man.........I'd given up on getting support for this in June!
But hey, I appreciate the support ...maybe people will pay more attention to it now.

I know you say just 1 attack per contry. but i think it will be a slow game. so let the samme contry attack all its borders..

What you are referring to is the original suggestion. If you read down on the first post of this topic, you would see that that concern of yours has been dealt with, as the suggestion is simply:

Newly conquered countries cannot attack for the duration of the turn they are conquered on.

So, all countries would be able to attack all bordering countries in the same turn. However, countries that were only gained in that turn would not be able to attack anything until the next turn.
Example:
Country A only borders Country B and Country C
Country B only borders Country D and Country E
Country C only borders Country F and Country G

Player 1 owns Countries A and B. They start their turn, and deploy on those two countries.
Player 1 then attacks and conquers Country C from Country A, and advances all of his armies. However, Country C cannot attack Countries F and G until the next turn.
Player 1 then attacks and conquers Country D from Country B. Player 1 decides to advance only half of his armies (which are now inactive for the rest of the turn)
Player 1 then attacks and conquers Country E from Country B, and then advances all remaining armies (which are also inactive for the rest of the turn)

I hope that example makes the parameters of my suggestion clear, if they were not already.

No not really, as that wasne't what i meant. I mean if lets say A conquer C and don't move all his army only 1. Then A should still be able to attack B

[OliverFA]

No not really, as that wasne't what i meant. I mean if lets say A conquer C and don't move all his army only 1. Then A should still be able to attack B

And that is how the suggestion works. The player can attack from any country that he owned at the begining of turn, but not from countries he just conquered during the turn.

[Androidz]

No not really, as that wasne't what i meant. I mean if lets say A conquer C and don't move all his army only 1. Then A should still be able to attack B

And that is how the suggestion works. The player can attack from any country that he owned at the begining of turn, but not from countries he just conquered during the turn.

thats good it did not sound like it worked like this.

[n00blet]

No not really, as that wasne't what i meant. I mean if lets say A conquer C and don't move all his army only 1. Then A should still be able to attack B

And that is how the suggestion works. The player can attack from any country that he owned at the begining of turn, but not from countries he just conquered during the turn.

thats good it did not sound like it worked like this.

Well, that's what I tried to explain, but somehow it got lost in my example
So.....what is your opinion now? Vote positive? Perhaps other people want to voice in on it?

[Androidz]

No not really, as that wasne't what i meant. I mean if lets say A conquer C and don't move all his army only 1. Then A should still be able to attack B

And that is how the suggestion works. The player can attack from any country that he owned at the begining of turn, but not from countries he just conquered during the turn.

thats good it did not sound like it worked like this.

Well, that's what I tried to explain, but somehow it got lost in my example
So.....what is your opinion now? Vote positive? Perhaps other people want to voice in on it?

Ive always been postive;)

[OliverFA]

No not really, as that wasne't what i meant. I mean if lets say A conquer C and don't move all his army only 1. Then A should still be able to attack B

And that is how the suggestion works. The player can attack from any country that he owned at the begining of turn, but not from countries he just conquered during the turn.

thats good it did not sound like it worked like this.

Well, that's what I tried to explain, but somehow it got lost in my example
So.....what is your opinion now? Vote positive? Perhaps other people want to voice in on it?

Nooblet, I think that Androidz has a point.

Maybe you should change the first post. Your "updated on suggestion" would become the suggestion itself, and would be the second paragraph (now is the third). And the specifics could move down to the end of the post. If you do in that way, new readers will get the idea soon and not get confused by all the explanation. However, if thery get interested, they can continue reading the post until the end, and they will read also your specifics.

PS: No you don't explain yourself badly, but the simpler and easier you make an explanation (without losing information of course) the better

[n00blet]

Maybe you should change the first post. Your "updated on suggestion" would become the suggestion itself, and would be the second paragraph (now is the third). And the specifics could move down to the end of the post. If you do in that way, new readers will get the idea soon and not get confused by all the explanation. However, if thery get interested, they can continue reading the post until the end, and they will read also your specifics.

Duly noted. Annnnnnd....edited.

[n00blet]

So, just to gauge interest here, if I were to make a 6 (or so) player game on the classic map, with the stipulation that all players who joined would play following the rules of this suggestion (so as to test it out, see if there are any problems that haven't been spotted and addressed yet), who would want to join?

If you're interested, please reply saying so.

[OliverFA]

I am looking forward to be a tester in that kind of game.

Only 4 more to go!!!

[sully800]

I love this idea and I would be willing to play in a tester game.

All hail the new gameplay ideas! This is the third one I fell in love with tonight It's about time we spice up Conquer Club.

[OliverFA]

only 3 to go!

[Ditocoaf]

Wait, this suggestion is back? Finally! Hell yes, I'm in!

[OliverFA]

Only 2 more testers needed!!!

[nemrehs1]

I think it is a good idea... i always like to try something new!