Moderator: Community Team
kcoenich wrote:jarrett155 wrote:to be honest you make no sense here... you are not arguing that this would restrict strategies but you are saying it makes the game more strategic..... i think you need to go get a dictionary and look up restrict.
yes, the game is more strategic, cause the strategy part of the game takes more importance...
kcoenich wrote:still you have to build up armies to win... but you need to build them in more territories and those territories have to be on strategic points to make them more effective...
kcoenich wrote:Concise description:
stablish
jakejakejakejake wrote:I think this is a fantastic idea. I think what a lot of these people aren't getting is that it would be *optional*. Don't like it? Don't play it.
Thezzaruz wrote:jakejakejakejake wrote:I think this is a fantastic idea. I think what a lot of these people aren't getting is that it would be *optional*. Don't like it? Don't play it.
I have nothing against new options as long as they add good/interesting new variants to play (even if I wouldn't like to play them myself). This option however I don't think would be a good/interesting variant. And poor options is, IMO, only detrimental to the site as it dilutes the number good/interesting games available.
jakejakejakejake wrote:That's great, but it seems most of the reasoning on this topic by others has been "NOOOOOOO IT WOULD RUIN *one specific game mode* FOREVER", which is absurd.
kcoenich wrote:any reasons why it would ruin them???
In an escalating game, there would get to be a point where, no matter how many places you had, you could not use the entire amount of troops. On Doodle Earth/Luxembourg even if you have all but one place, you only have 17. If the limit is 20, then if you turn in a set for 400, you cannot place all of the troops.
How is strategy enhanced by limiting the number of choices you have?
Return to Archived Suggestions
Users browsing this forum: No registered users