porkenbeans wrote:YES, for all the reasons you stated. Especialy the part about it being more realistic. More like the kind of ''RISK'' they play in the war rooms. A slow motion race, where you can see everything coming. Now if you could manage a way to eliminate the dice from the game, you would have a pure form of strategic conquest. akin to ''chess''. I suppose it could be done with a mathmaticle formala that would simply take in to account the number of forces in the fight. You can even have stronger armies than others. because of various reasons such as troop freshness, or even where the are from. Some armies are just better fighters. All in all, ...it is a wonderful idea.Ditocoaf wrote:This seems like a good option... I would definitely try a few games, and if there's a good possibility I'd like it and keep playing. It'd be a much slower game, but people already play no-cards adjacent, so that's not really an issue. It would require radically different strategies, which is why I like it so much. You could watch a group of armies advancing turn by turn. You couldn't take an area just by amassing one huge centralized force, instead it would be smarter to attack on all sides, to avoid counter-attacks... it might be more realistic in that respect.
A very emphatic yes to this idea.
If you want to try it out, feel free to pm me. I want as many people as possible to be able to test it out