[GP/UI] No Fortifications / Reinforcements

[TheForgivenOne]

Please, try using the search button. This has been suggested before. Merged

[Keredrex]

I think Unlimited Adjacent Fortifications would be a better option to add...

Basically same rule as Adjacent... but it can be done multiple times on your turn. trick is that when a fortification is made between 2 territories, that would be the end of movement for those troops. that way you can't run a continuous line as it is in Chained fortifications.

[Jerz]

This is my first forum post ever so it feels like I'm sticking my
neck out, but here are two simple Reinforcement options to change
up the game now and again. I checked to see if it had been
suggested, couldn't find it.

Reinforcement Options:

• 1) Old time risk, NO REINFORCEMENTS
  2) Adjacent reinforcements from all stacks, each turn.

Specifics/Details:
1) Self explanatory, you don't get any reinforcements after your turn
just like the original risk rules.

2) Again pretty self explanatory, just like existing adjacent rules,


Thanks, hope it makes sense!
except instead of only one adjacent move, if you have more than
one stack you can have an adjacent move for each stack. When you
get bonus's auto deployed on some maps, it makes it very difficult
to move them into position with the current adjacent rules

[sirgermaine]

I am pretty sure I have seen these each in the rejected pile, although I'm not exactly sure the reason. One was called unlimited adjacent reinforcements (which I assume wouldn't actually be unlimited because then they are exactly like unlimited regular). The other was just called no reinforcements. I think the number of conquest style maps kind of preclude that from happening. It'd be pretty rough to run a random map without reinforcements and turn up feudal epic, for example. I think of the two, I like the no reinforcements better, because it does force you to be very careful, and also would affect your attacking, if you knew you might unleash a big army by mistake. I think that the multiple adjacent mostly helps players who are already winning games, such that they have the most troops to be moving around, and whatever makes games more interesting is better, at least to me.

[chapcrap]

This is my first forum post ever.

It says you have 14 posts...

Anyway, this has been suggested before and I like it. It was called Unlimited Adjacent I think.

[agentcom]

I don't think they've been rejected, but I could be wrong. But definitely both have been suggested before.

[Jerz]

Oooops, sorry I haven't seen it. Thank you for taking the time to respond anyway!

As for the first time thing, I meant starting a subject, not commenting on someone else's.

Appreciate your time!

[AndyDufresne]

I think Lack has been considering a 'No Reinforcement' option for a while, so it is on his mind!


--Andy

[agentcom]

Andy, thanks for stopping by and updating a bunch of these suggestions. Nice to hear where some of them stand.

[qwert]

I think Lack has been considering a 'No Reinforcement' option for a while, so it is on his mind!


--Andy

andy this is year 2012, and this sugestion are from 2007, maybe its still to early for implementation ?

[MstrGny]

I have thought of this one for some time also. This would be the most realistic reinforcement option in my mind. Unlimited ie.transferring troops across the world in one turn is unrealistic. Chained is much the same, but limited to one group of troops. Adjacent is realistic in the space it covers, but unrealistic that you cannot move more than one group. Unlimited adjacent would be the correct way to say it, and would be the most the realistic i.e. move as many groups as you want, but only one space.

Real time risk, like Risk 2 could also be interesting. Pick your place(s) of battle, and decide how many troops to commit, realizing that your opponent(s) is also doing the same. After everyone decides, the battle(s) is executed autonmatically, and you are unable to call back troops if your battle doesn't quite your way. The reinforcing process would be a turn all in itself, followed by the next round of realtime risk, and so on.