[GP/UI] infected neutrals

[rebelman]

Why dont we just call them rebels .

[yeti_c]

Maybe the zombie attacks could just be completely random, instead of alphabetic. That way, it would be harder to prepare for where the zombies would go next. Of course, we'd also get a lot of complaints on the forums that the zombies aren't really random...

Actually - I suspect it might be easier to attack in XML order...

C.

[lord voldemort]

the only prob is alpabetically...im not keen on...like it could be abused this way

[yeti_c]

the only prob is alpabetically...im not keen on...like it could be abused this way

At least alphabetically people will know - and it wouldn't be abuse - it would be a tactic... if you do it correctly - you can unleash a devastating neutral army... if you do it wrong - or you get to close - you get yourself annihilated!!!

C.

[Skittles!]

Why dont we just call them rebels .

Yes, we're after you!

[lord voldemort]

the only prob is alpabetically...im not keen on...like it could be abused this way

At least alphabetically people will know - and it wouldn't be abuse - it would be a tactic... if you do it correctly - you can unleash a devastating neutral army... if you do it wrong - or you get to close - you get yourself annihilated!!!

C.

nah im sayin gpeople with z in ther name will abuse it..

[DiM]

the only prob is alpabetically...im not keen on...like it could be abused this way

At least alphabetically people will know - and it wouldn't be abuse - it would be a tactic... if you do it correctly - you can unleash a devastating neutral army... if you do it wrong - or you get to close - you get yourself annihilated!!!

C.

nah im sayin gpeople with z in ther name will abuse it..

it attacks terits alphabetically not players.

so if player XXX is in terit A and player MMM is in terit B the zombies will attack player XXX because his terit is alphabetically in front of B

[yeti_c]

Actually - I think we should go with alphabetical names!!!! (As long as it's not case sensitive!)

C.

[DiM]

Actually - I think we should go with alphabetical names!!!! (As long as it's not case sensitive!)

C.

no way. it should attack terits alphabetically not players.

[Bolbs]

lol funny how yeti_c is all for the zombies attacking players alphabetically but DiM wants them to attack territories alphabetically.

I'm obviously going to vote for territories as well

[dim3wit]

I'm with Mitchmitch11. "Zombies" sounds a little dumb.

Also, what if the territories are passive aggressive? So the neutral territories act normal until you attack them, then they hold a grudge... Would that style be best on a territory by territory or map-wide basis?

[PLAYER57832]

Like it, but wouldn't it be better to randomize the attacks rather than have them automatically attack alphabetically. Also, I would say randomize whether armies are pushed forward or remain (all or nothing, no in-between). With the possible exception if there is NO other territory near the attacking country -- that is, so attacks would end, regardless of numbers of armies.

That is, zombie is near countries A, B, C. zombie attacks B ... and either moves all deployable survivors onto B or not, depending on randomized answer. If 4 remain, attack proceeds.

OR zombie is near only C, attacks and automatically moves all armies onto C.

[KoE_Sirius]

I think its a brilliant idea.

[cicero]

Like it, but wouldn't it be better to randomize the attacks rather than have them automatically attack alphabetically. Also, I would say randomize whether armies are pushed forward or remain ... etc

PLAYER57832 and several other posters have suggested incorporating various elements of randomness into the behaviour of the zombies.

This completely spoils the behaviour and, I would suggest, makes it less likely that the idea will be implemented [purely predictable behaviour as described will be simple to code and quick to execute - no need for calls to the external random number source].

But this simplicity of implementation is not the driving reason behind my belief that the behavour should be predictable: There is already enough randomness in the CC experience. Increasing the randomness decreases the skill factor and, in relation to my suggestion, would remove the possibility for many of the tactics suggested ...

If you don't know which way the zombies will go then you can't deliberately release them to attack another player. If you don't know which way the zombies will go then you don't know if you need to head them off to stop them giving away an assassin game ... etc, etc.

The behaviour has to be predictable. And yes, alphabetically by territory name so that it is not open to abuse by players choosing to call themselves "zzzthethird" and is open to exploitation by map makers. I'd love to see what the creative types in the Foundry would make of it ...

Cicero

[Lone.prophet]

if it is alpabetical than it has do do with the luck where you start

maybe make it attack the weakest/strongest territory it can first than if they are the same alpabetical maybe