[GO] Zombie Player

by **DarthKinetic** on Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:29 pm

Community,

often times at home on the official board game versions of this game, we are lacking a 3rd or 4th player.
adding the "zombie" as a ghost player with specific rules allows for an interesting twist.

whats the chance we can introduce a AI to a zombie force/player to our games?

Some of our Zombie rules include, if you lose in battle, you forces dont die but instead get added ( ie. FEED ) the Zombie force in that Tert....

by **Army of GOD** on Mon Dec 19, 2011 2:29 pm

inb4 move to Suggs

by **owenshooter** on Mon Dec 19, 2011 3:06 pm

Army of GOD wrote:inb4 move to Suggs

QFT...-el Jesus negro

by **zimmah** on Mon Dec 19, 2011 9:56 pm

Army of GOD wrote:inb4 move to Suggs

in b4 rejected

by **Dukasaur** on Mon Dec 19, 2011 10:56 pm

Might be rejected, but overall it's not a bad idea.

by **owenshooter** on Mon Dec 19, 2011 11:07 pm

Dukasaur wrote:Might be rejected, but overall it's not a bad idea.

well, that means, "in before my grandkids see this implemented"...-el Jesus negro

by **Victor Sullivan** on Mon Dec 19, 2011 11:37 pm

Hooray for pessimism!!-the grey jesus

-Sully

by **Army of GOD** on Mon Dec 19, 2011 11:43 pm

The thing about this suggestion is that it's so obscure.

There are an infinite amount of "twists" we could put in the game and at a certain point they're just trivial. I would rather we get 12 player games, choose your own color, CC War clock and a medal pertaining to how many games you've played with Army of GOD.

by **rdsrds2120** on Tue Dec 20, 2011 12:07 am

Lobbed over to Suggs'.

-rd

by **zimmah** on Tue Dec 20, 2011 12:33 am

Dukasaur wrote:Might be rejected, but overall it's not a bad idea.

anything that involves AI is auto-reject. :roll:

by **Geger** on Tue Dec 20, 2011 12:47 am

zimmah wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:Might be rejected, but overall it's not a bad idea.

anything that involves AI is auto-reject.

Because if AI get good dices, we will have more dice complainers :mrgreen:

by **anonymus** on Tue Dec 20, 2011 3:54 am

Geger wrote:
zimmah wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:Might be rejected, but overall it's not a bad idea.

anything that involves AI is auto-reject.

Because if AI get good dices, we will have more dice complainers

also not good training AI's in world domination..

/

by **rhp 1** on Sat Jan 07, 2012 3:32 pm

with all the dice, luck, lag bitching on this site...you wanna add something else unpredictable for someone to cry about? what a fantastic idea...

by **phantomzero** on Sat Jan 07, 2012 3:47 pm

anonymus wrote:
Geger wrote:
zimmah wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:Might be rejected, but overall it's not a bad idea.

anything that involves AI is auto-reject.

Because if AI get good dices, we will have more dice complainers

also not good training AI's in world domination..

/

This made me laugh out loud for a few seconds. thanks for making my day better one terminator reference at a time.

Now back to the topic at hand. Sometimes it's nice to play with oneself.

by **patrickaa317** on Sun Jan 08, 2012 7:32 pm

phantomzero wrote:
anonymus wrote:
Geger wrote:
zimmah wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:Might be rejected, but overall it's not a bad idea.

anything that involves AI is auto-reject.

Because if AI get good dices, we will have more dice complainers

also not good training AI's in world domination..

/

This made me laugh out loud for a few seconds. thanks for making my day better one terminator reference at a time.

Now back to the topic at hand. Sometimes it's nice to play with oneself.