Max number of troops on each territory....

[SirSebstar]

this proposal caps the total amount of troops on the board, so you can have one stack of 200 or 5 of 40.. of something along those lines

[JoshyBoy]

This idea is pure bullshit. If you don't want to stack, then don't. And don't start whining about it trying to take away one aspect of Conquer Club. Pure bullshit.

[SirSebstar]

lol
joshyboy, i think the idea is how to limit that others cannot stack...

still the idea has inherent flaws, slightly appealing to me, but flawed. So it needs work before it can be considered functional.

e.g. how to deal with large/ small maps.
escalating cards ect ect

[sniffie]

lol
joshyboy, i think the idea is how to limit that others cannot stack...

still the idea has inherent flaws, slightly appealing to me, but flawed. So it needs work before it can be considered functional.

e.g. how to deal with large/ small maps.
escalating cards ect ect

the only thing I can add is, how are you going to fix the problem with escalating??

sniff

[jonesthecurl]

I like this idea. It has to be an option at game set up not a general rule, so that if people like "infinite stack" they won't start or join an "army limit" game, just as you can avoid foggy or nuclear by simply not playing them.

[SirSebstar]

I like this idea. It has to be an option at game set up not a general rule, so that if people like "infinite stack" they won't start or join an "army limit" game, just as you can avoid foggy or nuclear by simply not playing them.

obviously. but still correct. Option only.

Der sniffter, you add the same as I did, escalating? or is that your only concern?

[nebsmith]

The idea is to set the limit at an appropriate size for the type of game you want to play. So with escalating you either don't use a troop limit as an option or you set it high.
For small maps set a smaller limit. That is why I suggested using a multiple of the number of territories on the map as a limit, for one of the options.
What I am suggesting is a variable limit decided by the one who sets up the game.
Say between 5 and 20 times territories.
The limit to apply to the total troops of each player. So on a map with 50 territorries and the multiplier set at 10 no-one could have more than 500 troops in total.
I see the biggest problem being deciding what the limits of troops should be, does anyone have a suggestion for what to set them between?
Also maybe it shouldn't be variable, maybe a set multiple for all maps.

[sniffie]

I like this idea. It has to be an option at game set up not a general rule, so that if people like "infinite stack" they won't start or join an "army limit" game, just as you can avoid foggy or nuclear by simply not playing them.

obviously. but still correct. Option only.

Der sniffter, you add the same as I did, escalating? or is that your only concern?

maybe doubled that problem, sorry for that. But I think its the biggest problem within this suggestion. For exmaple

Log: next set: 50 troops
Player cashes: Player recieves 1 troops for cashing card A, card B and Card C.

I woul really feel "shitty" about it.

sniff

[nebsmith]

I don't see that it matters where you get the troops from, normal reinforcements or a 50 set. The idea is to force some movement in a game. If you are in the situation you describe - 50 due, only able to take 1 - then you either use up some troops attacking in the previous round/s or you take the penalty for doing nothing.
Or you don't use a limited troop option in escalating games, which anyway tend to be decided more quickly, once someone gets the eliminate and cash stategy going.

[OliverFA]

The problem that I see with this proposal is that the limit is rather arbirtary. I prefer to base the limit in things that make sense.

[nebsmith]

any suggestion as to what to base any limits on ?

[OliverFA]

There are two types of suggestiong dealing with limits in armies, and both make sense in their own way. One is upkeep and the other is stack limit per territory. I suppose that stack limit per territory makes more sense in this thread. The "logic" is that territories can't fit an unlimited number of armies, they have some space after all, and that's the reason of limiting the number of armies per territories.

[nvrijn]

Good concept, but I don't think this would be as effective as you hope. I've been in Fixed value Risk games which go on forever, as players swap the same 1 defender territory over and over to get their risk cards.

All this would do is force "No Spoils" games into that cycle. What would be systemic change would be the ability for the survivors to declare they ALL wanted a tie ... and have the game end and all the points calculated as if they were a team.

Just a thought

[DoomYoshi]

Concise description:

• Incorporate a troop maximum on territories, or across the board

There are many ways to implement this:
Specifics/Details:

• XML update that allows smaller numbers of troops on specific territories (e.g. Downtown on Montreal can have a maximum stack of 25 troops since extra troops would cause unrest)
• Option that allows a max stack sizep; would be an option at beginning of game [10, 20, 30, 50, 100, no limit] and would apply to all territories; would only come into effect at end of turn so it would need a new 'troop elimination phase'
• a dynamic, calculated system in which the max number of troops is based on how many territories you have that form a single-chain; this mode would be off-limits for n00bs and would add a whole new element of cutting off supply lines

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• Let's be honest here: turn limits suck. Instead of stopping deadlocks, they cause players to stop attacking and just start stacking. You know what I call it when players stop attacking and just start stacking? I call that a motherfucking deadlock. So turn limits which were supposed to get rid of this problem actually made it worse. At first, I was thinking that if the turn limit was reached, a random thing determined the winner (from a pool of possibilities: most cards, most troops, most territories, highest deployment bonus, most successful attacks) then players wouldn't just shut down and stop playing. However, anytime something random is introduced, players complain.
• Turn limits should be 'un-integrated'. They didn't do what they are supposed to do.
• This will prevent deadlocks.

[chapcrap]

Yes!! XML updates please!!