Adjacent Attacks

Suggestions that have made it through the grind, and have become integrated into the site!

Moderators: Suggestions Team, Global Moderators

What do you think about Adjacent Attacks?

I would support this being an option
293
65%
I would oppose this being an option
117
26%
I don't care/I don't know yet
43
9%
 
Total votes : 453

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby Ditocoaf on Mon Nov 17, 2008 3:23 pm

denominator wrote:Plus, I think this would work better with the No Cards option. That burst of troops at the right time from cards is way more of a momentum swing in this than in regular games.

Definitely. The escalating game we played turned out to be a lot of fun, but Sully went from last place to first in a single cash... because he had a few key territories in the center of asia, from which he could conquer most of the continent in a turn.

So the number of borders a territ has becomes really important: if it has a lot, then you can expand much more quickly. If it has only a few, then it's easier to defend. This sounds like it should be natural, but it doesn't really work like that with unlimited attacks.
Image

>----------✪ Try to take down the champion in the continuous IPW/GIL tournament! ✪----------<

Note to self: THINK LESS LIVE MORE
Private 1st Class Ditocoaf
 
Posts: 1054
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 9:17 pm
Location: Being eaten by the worms and weird fishes
Medals: 2
Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (1)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby sully800 on Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:17 pm

Ditocoaf wrote:
denominator wrote:Plus, I think this would work better with the No Cards option. That burst of troops at the right time from cards is way more of a momentum swing in this than in regular games.

Definitely. The escalating game we played turned out to be a lot of fun, but Sully went from last place to first in a single cash... because he had a few key territories in the center of asia, from which he could conquer most of the continent in a turn.

So the number of borders a territ has becomes really important: if it has a lot, then you can expand much more quickly. If it has only a few, then it's easier to defend. This sounds like it should be natural, but it doesn't really work like that with unlimited attacks.


I was possibly in last place, its hard to say because the armies fluctuated so much every three rounds. But the reason I went into first place was because I killed someone else. I don't remember the details without looking, but someone killed a few of pink's territories and essentially hung him for me. Then I end up with a double cash and lots of territories which is hard to defeat.

So its the same as any escalating game: Multiple cash ins can be very important. However unlike most escalating games its very easy to protect other players and realize when someone is in danger.
User avatar
Major sully800
 
Posts: 4999
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 5:45 pm
Location: Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
Medals: 27
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2) Assassin Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2)
Fog of War Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1)
General Achievement (3) Map Contribution (1) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (5)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby n00blet on Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:48 pm

sully800 wrote:
Ditocoaf wrote:
denominator wrote:Plus, I think this would work better with the No Cards option. That burst of troops at the right time from cards is way more of a momentum swing in this than in regular games.

Definitely. The escalating game we played turned out to be a lot of fun, but Sully went from last place to first in a single cash... because he had a few key territories in the center of asia, from which he could conquer most of the continent in a turn.

So the number of borders a territ has becomes really important: if it has a lot, then you can expand much more quickly. If it has only a few, then it's easier to defend. This sounds like it should be natural, but it doesn't really work like that with unlimited attacks.


I was possibly in last place, its hard to say because the armies fluctuated so much every three rounds. But the reason I went into first place was because I killed someone else. I don't remember the details without looking, but someone killed a few of pink's territories and essentially hung him for me. Then I end up with a double cash and lots of territories which is hard to defeat.

So its the same as any escalating game: Multiple cash ins can be very important. However unlike most escalating games its very easy to protect other players and realize when someone is in danger.


I know I would play a lot more escalating games (with AA) if it was implemented, to be sure. It was definitely the most interesting of the games we've played with AA so far.
User avatar
Captain n00blet
 
Posts: 689
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 7:09 pm
Medals: 22
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (2)
General Achievement (2) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (1)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby Ditocoaf on Thu Nov 20, 2008 12:44 am

Would anybody be interested in trying this out on another one of the very popular maps? I'm thinking it'd be nice to experiment with feudal war this way. I personally predict it'll be a lot of fun...

I'm thinking sunny/flatrate. I'd also like to try out something other than adjacent reinforcements, just for the hell of it... would unlimited be okay?
Image

>----------✪ Try to take down the champion in the continuous IPW/GIL tournament! ✪----------<

Note to self: THINK LESS LIVE MORE
Private 1st Class Ditocoaf
 
Posts: 1054
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 9:17 pm
Location: Being eaten by the worms and weird fishes
Medals: 2
Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (1)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby n00blet on Thu Nov 20, 2008 1:05 am

Yeah...I was thinking of going into the other maps/fortification settings to see what would happen. Feudal would be perfect.

Annnnnddddd.....it's up: Game 3695712.

Join up! :)


(as always, if you haven't played any AA games before, please pm me and I will send you the password for these type of games)
User avatar
Captain n00blet
 
Posts: 689
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 7:09 pm
Medals: 22
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (2)
General Achievement (2) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (1)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby yeti_c on Thu Nov 20, 2008 4:37 am

n00blet wrote:Yeah...I was thinking of going into the other maps/fortification settings to see what would happen. Feudal would be perfect.

Annnnnddddd.....it's up: Game 3695712.

Join up! :)


(as always, if you haven't played any AA games before, please pm me and I will send you the password for these type of games)


IN IN AAAAAAAAAANNNNNNDDDDD IN!!!

Feudal on AA is gonna take months - but it's gonna be ace!!

C.
Image
Highest score : 2297
User avatar
Lieutenant yeti_c
 
Posts: 9670
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 9:02 am
Medals: 46
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3)
General Achievement (1) Map Contribution (13) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (10)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby Ditocoaf on Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:08 am

yeti_c wrote:IN IN AAAAAAAAAANNNNNNDDDDD IN!!!

Feudal on AA is gonna take months - but it's gonna be ace!!

C.

I think we should always refer to Feudal AA as "überchess" in the future.
Image

>----------✪ Try to take down the champion in the continuous IPW/GIL tournament! ✪----------<

Note to self: THINK LESS LIVE MORE
Private 1st Class Ditocoaf
 
Posts: 1054
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 9:17 pm
Location: Being eaten by the worms and weird fishes
Medals: 2
Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (1)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby yeti_c on Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:10 am

Ditocoaf wrote:
yeti_c wrote:IN IN AAAAAAAAAANNNNNNDDDDD IN!!!

Feudal on AA is gonna take months - but it's gonna be ace!!

C.

I think we should always refer to Feudal AA as "überchess" in the future.


He he he - I like it!!

C.
Image
Highest score : 2297
User avatar
Lieutenant yeti_c
 
Posts: 9670
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 9:02 am
Medals: 46
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3)
General Achievement (1) Map Contribution (13) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (10)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby SuicidalSnowman on Fri Nov 21, 2008 7:15 pm

Hope you don't mind, but I decided to crash your guys party (but play by your rules)
User avatar
Private SuicidalSnowman
 
Posts: 1020
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:40 am
Medals: 28
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)
Clan Achievement (1) Training Achievement (1) General Contribution (1)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby Ditocoaf on Fri Nov 21, 2008 7:19 pm

SuicidalSnowman wrote:Hope you don't mind, but I decided to crash your guys party (but play by your rules)

Of course we don't mind. But are you implying you didn't PM nooblet? How did you get the pass?
Image

>----------✪ Try to take down the champion in the continuous IPW/GIL tournament! ✪----------<

Note to self: THINK LESS LIVE MORE
Private 1st Class Ditocoaf
 
Posts: 1054
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 9:17 pm
Location: Being eaten by the worms and weird fishes
Medals: 2
Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (1)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby SuicidalSnowman on Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:38 pm

Ditocoaf wrote:Of course we don't mind. But are you implying you didn't PM nooblet? How did you get the pass?


No, I PMed him a week ago. I have followed this topic for quite sometime. I really like the idea. I think it is an innovative way to play. It also fits my play style of slow and plodding, and long term strategy. I am excited to give it a try.
User avatar
Private SuicidalSnowman
 
Posts: 1020
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:40 am
Medals: 28
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)
Clan Achievement (1) Training Achievement (1) General Contribution (1)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby SuicidalSnowman on Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:40 pm

Also, if I can start talking strategy, the middle castle is now the best, as it has the most territories touching it, allowing the most freedom of movement at the start. Some of them are so narrow it is going to be slow going at the start.
User avatar
Private SuicidalSnowman
 
Posts: 1020
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:40 am
Medals: 28
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)
Clan Achievement (1) Training Achievement (1) General Contribution (1)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby n00blet on Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:27 pm

SuicidalSnowman wrote:Also, if I can start talking strategy, the middle castle is now the best, as it has the most territories touching it, allowing the most freedom of movement at the start. Some of them are so narrow it is going to be slow going at the start.


That's true in the beginning, although later in the game it would be the most vulnerable to capture as there are the fewest territories between it and its outermost territories. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out....
User avatar
Captain n00blet
 
Posts: 689
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 7:09 pm
Medals: 22
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (2)
General Achievement (2) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (1)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby n00blet on Sat Nov 22, 2008 11:45 pm

Still one more spot open in Game 3695712.
You know you want to ;)
User avatar
Captain n00blet
 
Posts: 689
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 7:09 pm
Medals: 22
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (2)
General Achievement (2) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (1)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby sully800 on Sun Nov 23, 2008 11:53 am

Let's do another escalating game!
User avatar
Major sully800
 
Posts: 4999
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 5:45 pm
Location: Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
Medals: 27
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2) Assassin Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2)
Fog of War Achievement (2) Speed Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (2) Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (1)
General Achievement (3) Map Contribution (1) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (5)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby Blinkadyblink on Sun Nov 23, 2008 7:36 pm

Having finished my first adjacent attacks game, I thought I'd write a little about the game and strategies and how I thought they differed from normal play.

First, a few disclaimers:
1. I played a standard, sequential, flat rate game with adjacent fortifications and no fog on World 2.1. Any other AA games played with different settings are most likely very different.
2. This was my first time ever playing on World 2.1, and so anything that I attribute to AA could actually just be the map.
3. Everything I write, unless it is obviously indisputable fact, is my opinion and may or may not agree with other people's opinions.

I felt the game could be divided up into three parts, which for lack of better terms, I'll call the beginning, middle, and end. Each of these parts had unique events and strategies, and, more importantly, each was affected by AA differently.

I'll define the beginning as the time from the start of the game to the point at which all surviving players had at least one continent and most of their territories were contiguous. This part was probably the least affected by AA, simply because even in a normal game, people tend to only attack one or two territories per turn. Attacking three territories defended by three armies each with a six army deployment essentially amounts to suicide. That being said, as this stage progressed people did begin attacking three and four territories a turn, and probably could have attacked more without AA. I don't think AA changed what happened in this part, but it may have happened more quickly in a normal game.

By my definition, the middle was the time between the end of the beginning and the point at which one player received more armies per turn than all his opponents put together. This stage lasted the longest, and, although the beginning certainly had some effect on the outcome of the game, the winner was ultimately decided in the middle. I think that this was also the part most influenced by AA. Once everyone had a continent, their primary goal became protecting it. The easiest way to do this in AA is with buffer territories. Because your opponents can't attack from a territory they conquer on their turn, as long as you keep at least one buffer territory between your continent and your opponent, it is physically impossible for your opponent to break your bonus.

In many cases, there is one buffer territory between two continents, and the owners of both continents have to fight over it to decide who's bonus remains protected and whose gets broken. I had a lengthy battle with Nooblet over North East Brazil, a buffer territory between his bonuses (Amazonas and La Plata,) and mine (Magreb and Africa as a whole) that was not resolved until the end of the game. Basically, each of us attacked it on our turns, so neither of us got a chance to break the other's bonus.

Sometimes, however there are no buffer territories between two continents, and in these cases the owner of one continent breaks the other person's bonus on his turn, and then the owner of the other continent must use his turn to reclaim his bonus and cannot break his opponent's. This happened to me when I controlled the Middle East and Sully had Indian Subcontinent. He was able to attack Iran, breaking my bonus, every turn, while on my turn I could only take back Iran and could never break his bonus.

The game essentially became a series of stalemated border disputes, in which the front never advanced more than one territory in either direction until the very end.

The main strategy I used was attacking every territory I possibly could every turn and then advancing only one or two armies, so that my opponents couldn't slaughter my entire force. Unfortunately, this eventually led to my loss of the Africa bonus, and then I started advancing all my troops into conquered territories and hoping that sooner or later my opponents would fail to win back the territory and the front would move in the direction I wanted.

I define the end as the period from the end of the middle to the end of the game. In the normal games I've played, the end often begins when one player controls over half the armies on the board, but in this case Sully was the first to manage that, and yet he was not able to kill the rest of us. This was partly due to how slowly AA forced him to advance and partly due to the enormous bonuses in World 2.1. At any rate, AA affected when the end came, but once it did come, the outcome was decided and all AA did was slow it down.

In terms of overall strategy, I think that there is different strategy in normal and AA games, but not necessarily more or less in either one. In AA, there are fewer options during your attack phase, and therefore less strategy involved in picking the best one. On the other hand, there is more strategy involved in the AA deployment phase. If you don't deploy in the right place, you won't be able to fight on all your fronts and your opponent will gain ground that you may never be able to reclaim. As a result the stakes are much higher during deployment in AA than in a regular game.

I hope you had fun reading through all this; I'm not sure how clear I was, but it all made sense in my head :roll:
User avatar
Colonel Blinkadyblink
 
Posts: 472
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 6:19 pm
Location: The Local Group
Medals: 51
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Battle Royale Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (12) General Achievement (5) Clan Achievement (5) Tournament Contribution (2)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby n00blet on Sun Nov 23, 2008 8:48 pm

wOw blink....long post :lol:

Read it all, of course (life? nah....). I would have to agree on the main points about the border stalemates and importance of the deploy stage =D> .

sully800 wrote:Let's do another escalating game!


I made another one (Game 3613149). You missed it ](*,)

I'll probably start another some time in the near future. :) Of course, if you want to make one before then, go right ahead. If you post it in this thread, people will join.
User avatar
Captain n00blet
 
Posts: 689
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 7:09 pm
Medals: 22
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (2) Fog of War Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (2) Cross-Map Achievement (2)
General Achievement (2) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (1)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby Ditocoaf on Sun Nov 23, 2008 8:57 pm

I think it's time to start asking for this sugg's consideration. With a 93% approval rating (ignoring neutral-votes), and a cult following of honor-system games, Adjacent Attacks has very clear support.
Image

>----------✪ Try to take down the champion in the continuous IPW/GIL tournament! ✪----------<

Note to self: THINK LESS LIVE MORE
Private 1st Class Ditocoaf
 
Posts: 1054
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 9:17 pm
Location: Being eaten by the worms and weird fishes
Medals: 2
Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (1)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby Blinkadyblink on Mon Nov 24, 2008 3:33 pm

n00blet wrote:wOw blink....long post :lol:


Thank you.

I got it over 900 words :P.
User avatar
Colonel Blinkadyblink
 
Posts: 472
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 6:19 pm
Location: The Local Group
Medals: 51
Standard Achievement (3) Doubles Achievement (1) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (1) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3)
Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (1) Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Battle Royale Achievement (1)
Ratings Achievement (2) Tournament Achievement (12) General Achievement (5) Clan Achievement (5) Tournament Contribution (2)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby denominator on Wed Nov 26, 2008 3:38 am

In regular games, the mid-turn cash of cards is a big deal (after you eliminate a player), especially in escalating games, where it makes kill runs possible. However, how mid-turn cashes can be dealt with leaves 2 possibilities. We started touching on this in the game chat in 3613839, but I figured it's a big enough discussion to get moved to the thread where everybody can comment on it.

Basically, it comes down to two possibilities.

(1) - The territories you have at the beginning of your turn are still the only ones you can attack from. This means a kill cash only fortifies your borders, and deployed troops to newly conquered territories follow the same rules as those advanced there.

(2) - Once you deploy on a territory, it "resets" to being able to conquer new territories. This means that any territory you own when you cash cards is reopened to attacks, and a kill cash allows you to move your armies much, much quicker on all fronts.

While at first I was fully in favour of option 1, the more I think about it I believe option 2 has much relevance. I believe that any newly deployed troops should be allowed to attack, following adjacent attack rules. While I haven't played an escalating game yet, I think this would dramatically affect the strategy of setting up for a kill, even in AA.

For example, in the game above, it was clear that Haggis (pink) was on the rocks and about to be eliminated. However, in my (blue) position, it wasn't worth setting up a takeout on the prior turn because I would weaken my own borders so much by advancing into such a position. If I had been able to attack again once cashed, I certainly would have taken this gamble, because a mid-turn cash allows my armies to advance 2 territories per turn, rather than the usual 1. It would have been possible to completely fortify the Asia-North America choke point border by gaining those 2 territories in one go. In the end, it didn't matter because n00blet (red) eliminated Haggis before I even had a chance.

It's an interesting dilemma, and I think we ought to try it both ways and see if one way or the other works better. Regardless, I'm interested to see what others have to think on it.
Image
User avatar
Captain denominator
Beta Team Member
Beta Team Member
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 9:41 am
Location: Calgary
Medals: 74
Standard Achievement (4) Doubles Achievement (3) Triples Achievement (3) Quadruples Achievement (4) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (2) Manual Troops Achievement (2) Freestyle Achievement (3) Polymorphic Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (3)
Fog of War Achievement (4) Trench Warfare Achievement (3) Speed Achievement (2) Teammate Achievement (2) Random Map Achievement (2)
Cross-Map Achievement (4) Beta Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (11) General Achievement (7)
Clan Achievement (5) Challenge Achievement (2)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby Ditocoaf on Wed Nov 26, 2008 4:28 am

Denom, there's no need to complicate this further... it's still advantageous to make a kill, because the extra armies can be used to better defend your position, and also to expand in the other directions.

Right now, it's a simple rule; that can be explained in any number of ways that are all short sentences. Adding clarifications and complications will just detract from what should be a simple toggle, imo. While the mid-turn cash may be something important strategically, I don't think it's really something so important game-mechanics-wise to warrant a change in the rules.
Image

>----------✪ Try to take down the champion in the continuous IPW/GIL tournament! ✪----------<

Note to self: THINK LESS LIVE MORE
Private 1st Class Ditocoaf
 
Posts: 1054
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 9:17 pm
Location: Being eaten by the worms and weird fishes
Medals: 2
Ratings Achievement (1) Tournament Achievement (1)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby yeti_c on Wed Nov 26, 2008 4:37 am

denominator wrote:In regular games, the mid-turn cash of cards is a big deal (after you eliminate a player), especially in escalating games, where it makes kill runs possible. However, how mid-turn cashes can be dealt with leaves 2 possibilities. We started touching on this in the game chat in 3613839, but I figured it's a big enough discussion to get moved to the thread where everybody can comment on it.

Basically, it comes down to two possibilities.

(1) - The territories you have at the beginning of your turn are still the only ones you can attack from. This means a kill cash only fortifies your borders, and deployed troops to newly conquered territories follow the same rules as those advanced there.

(2) - Once you deploy on a territory, it "resets" to being able to conquer new territories. This means that any territory you own when you cash cards is reopened to attacks, and a kill cash allows you to move your armies much, much quicker on all fronts.

While at first I was fully in favour of option 1, the more I think about it I believe option 2 has much relevance. I believe that any newly deployed troops should be allowed to attack, following adjacent attack rules. While I haven't played an escalating game yet, I think this would dramatically affect the strategy of setting up for a kill, even in AA.

For example, in the game above, it was clear that Haggis (pink) was on the rocks and about to be eliminated. However, in my (blue) position, it wasn't worth setting up a takeout on the prior turn because I would weaken my own borders so much by advancing into such a position. If I had been able to attack again once cashed, I certainly would have taken this gamble, because a mid-turn cash allows my armies to advance 2 territories per turn, rather than the usual 1. It would have been possible to completely fortify the Asia-North America choke point border by gaining those 2 territories in one go. In the end, it didn't matter because n00blet (red) eliminated Haggis before I even had a chance.

It's an interesting dilemma, and I think we ought to try it both ways and see if one way or the other works better. Regardless, I'm interested to see what others have to think on it.


Option 2 seems too open...

i.e. it should only allow attacking from where you place armies... - and realistically should only include the armies you have placed...

It shouldn't allow you to place armies on one side of the map - and allow extra attacking on the other side.

Therefore - I guess Option 1 is a lot safer.

C.
Image
Highest score : 2297
User avatar
Lieutenant yeti_c
 
Posts: 9670
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 9:02 am
Medals: 46
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3)
General Achievement (1) Map Contribution (13) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (10)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby SuicidalSnowman on Wed Nov 26, 2008 6:40 am

Denominator's idea is highly logical and even fits with the motivation behind rules such as adjacent attacks, that is that it is unrealistic to expect an army to roll across the world in a series of quick successions without any other army even moving. When you capture an opponents stronghold, surely there would be sympathizers or 'the liberated' to join your side, plus we can all imagine the excited fever pitch of a total victory spurning people on.

And strategically, it does make sense that going for a mid turn cash should give you more strength, it makes setting up and completing a kill much more important. A bigger risk for a bigger reward.

My final point of support for this is that it only opens up territories re-deployed on, and even then, only one more space.

Having said all that, I do understand the thought behind leaving it as it is to keep things simple and make it easier to balance. Especially as this is something new, and we know how much inertia this site has.
User avatar
Private SuicidalSnowman
 
Posts: 1020
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 7:40 am
Medals: 28
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (1) Quadruples Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (2)
Assassin Achievement (1) Nuclear Spoils Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (2) Trench Warfare Achievement (1) Teammate Achievement (1)
Random Map Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (4) Tournament Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)
Clan Achievement (1) Training Achievement (1) General Contribution (1)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby yeti_c on Wed Nov 26, 2008 8:56 am

Option 2 really does change the game play in a way...

It also means you have to be a lot more strategically aware...

i.e. - you're going to kill one guy on the right - but if you attack some on the left first - then once you kill the guy on the right - you can drop on the left and make more ground up...

But - does that not completely change the reason behind AA - i.e. the realisticness of it... why should a group of guys half a world away - be able to attack further - just cos they got 1 more reinforcement?

C.
Image
Highest score : 2297
User avatar
Lieutenant yeti_c
 
Posts: 9670
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 9:02 am
Medals: 46
Standard Achievement (2) Doubles Achievement (2) Triples Achievement (2) Quadruples Achievement (3) Terminator Achievement (1)
Assassin Achievement (1) Freestyle Achievement (1) Fog of War Achievement (3) Cross-Map Achievement (3) Ratings Achievement (3)
General Achievement (1) Map Contribution (13) Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (10)

Re: Adjacent Attacks

Postby lancehoch on Wed Nov 26, 2008 9:46 am

I believe we also had this discussion in Game 3436975. We came to the decision that option 1 is more with the spirit of the rule. One of the biggest reasons that this became a suggestion was that nooblet did not like the way someone could cash mid-turn and sweep the board. By allowing someone to continue attacking when they reinforce a territory, you are in essence still allowing the board sweeping maneuver.
Lieutenant lancehoch
 
Posts: 4158
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 4:13 pm
Medals: 11
Standard Achievement (2) Terminator Achievement (1) Cross-Map Achievement (1) Ratings Achievement (1) General Achievement (1)
Tournament Contribution (1) General Contribution (4)

PreviousNext

Return to Implemented Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

Login