[GO] Split Adjacent Forts

[JupitersKing]

Single Unlimited Reinforment

This is a similar but different idea to one I saw rejected concerning reinforcements.

At the end of the turn a player can make unlimited reinforcements into or from a single territory.

For example, I hold Central America with 7 armies and own Venazeula, Western & Eastern US. I can move 2 armies into each from Central America as my reinforcement (or in this case disbursement) move.

Likewise, if I hold the four amentioned territories and have 4 armies on each Venezwalla, Western & Eastern US I can move 3 armies from each into Central America as my reinforcement move.

I think this would add much to historical and military realism for maps that have lots of smaller territories that border many others. It would also be a way to get rid of the absurd notion that armies can march from Alaska to North Africa in a single turn as long as there are friendlies along the way to cheer them through.

JK

PS Anyone know how to spell Venezaula?

Without looking at the map.

[nyg5680]

correct me if im rong but isnt that unlimited fortifications

[Lone.prophet]

no it is u can make unlim fort from only 1 countrie so if u have a stacked army u can divide them in all lands

[nyg5680]

o0o0o

[JupitersKing]

No, with unlimited reinforcemnts you can move any army anywhere.

With this you can only do it from one territory into adjacent territories, or from several territories into a single adjacent. you may also only make one such move, whereas unlimited means multiple reinforcement moves.

JK

[Wisse]

PS Anyone know how to spell Venezaula?

Venezuela

[CreepyUncleAndy]

Yes! Now IN ONE TURN (I always play "Chained") I'll be able to gather that extra army in Turkey, those two stranded in Iceland, the five wandering across Africa and those eight that got stuck defending Venezuela when my pincer attack across the Atlantic succeeded in taking South America.

I like this idea. With Single Unlimited Reinforcement selected as the method of fortification, you could basically have an "army base" in the form of numerous armies located on a single territory far from the action of the front lines, from which armies could be deployed to hotspots around the globe. Just like Fort Bragg! Of course, such army bases also come with shady car dealerships, expensive taxis and scores upon scores of strip clubs and whore houses, so maybe it's not such a good idea. Wait, this is just a (very abstract) game.

But, seriously, this is the fortification option I've been waiting for. The only question is....

Should we require that the "army base" *must* be a territory that was owned at the beginning of your turn? Large scale logistical operations get awfully hampered when you've still got insurgents and partisans to clean up. Of course, a full-scale blitzkrieg deep into enemy territory followed by a mass-exodus of troops to four or five critical borderlands is, erm, possible now with unlimited fortifications (and critically effective), but that kind of thing should probably remain within the realm of unlimited fortification games.

[JupitersKing]

Yes! Now IN ONE TURN (I always play "Chained") I'll be able to gather that extra army in Turkey, those two stranded in Iceland, the five wandering across Africa and those eight that got stuck defending Venezuela when my pincer attack across the Atlantic succeeded in taking South America.

Not quite CUA, they would have to be adjacent to each other... you couldn't send armies from say Alaska and the Middle East to Iceland, that is Unlimited Reinforcements and you might as well just use UR in that case. It's a mix between unlimited and adjacent reinforcements.

With this though you could attack Southern Europe from the Middle East and then move some to Ukraine and some to North Africa to bolster your borders. I've used this rule for years in live play and it allows you to build up for an attack in one area and then spread them for defense at the end of your turn.

Say you have Asia and Africa and I have Southern Europe with 10 armies. You can dump your 25 armies (just an example) on the Middle East and then move 20 into Southern Europe when you take it. Then move 4 or 5 to North Africa and Ukraine to bolster, while leaving 10 or 12 on Southern Europe for defense. The flip side of this is the same as above but you loose more armies than you hoped in taking Southern Europe, now you can move a few from Ukraine and North Africa into Southern Europe to bolster the center front. But now you can't move from Japan to Alaska, or elsewhere, in addition to this first move.

JK

[JupitersKing]

Been thinking of your idea Andy, it's starting to grow on me... like a fungus, sort of...

However, we'd have to call it Capitol Reinforcements, or something like that and make it a single territory that you can send troops to and from, say Iceland, then I could send troops from Iceland, or to Iceland. It would be almost like a Strategic Reserve, which would be more realistic in a way, since in every war armies are held in reserve no matter what. Look at the American Civil War, even while Grant had Lee hemmed in at Richmond/Petersburg Jeff Davis refused to send him troops from Kirby Smiths' Trans-Mississippi Front.

The other thing we could do with this... loose your Capitol and your knocked out of the game and your remaining forces go nuetral or get divided between the remaining players.

I'll have to play it out a few times on a real board and see how I like it.

JK

PS How long where you stationed at Bragg?

[greenoaks]

Improve Adjacent Forts


Concise description:

• Allow multiple forts from 1 terit to any and all adjacent territories

Specifics/Details:

• Instead of forting all troops from 1 terit to another you could fort some to the one on the left and some to the one on the right
• If all troops are moved from that terit (in 1 or more goes) the message/button 'You can make no more Fortifications' appears for you to click and end your turn
• If you do not wish to move all troops, fort those you want to move to 1 or more adjacent territories then select 'End Forts' like you do now for Unlimited

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

• Similar to the sug by VS called Shotgun Reinforcements however it would be an improvement to an existing option, not an additional one
• It would reinvigorate Adjacent Fortifications, increasing the demand to play it instead of Chained or Unlimited
• It would increase the movement of troops in team games as stacks can be split and reformed with greater ease

[chapcrap]

Kind of interesting... If you were going to do this for adjacent, why not for chained too?

[greenoaks]

Kind of interesting... If you were going to do this for adjacent, why not for chained too?

although it could very well apply to that, chained is already a very popular setting.

this is about generating interest in an underused setting.

[chapcrap]

Yeah, I understand the goal. I'm just thinking confusion will arise about chained and adjacent being setup differently.

[Funkyterrance]

I am actually a big fan of adjacent. I wouldn't mind this option as long as I could still have the old fashioned adjacent option too. But who knows, over time I might end up liking this version better, it has some attractive possibilities. I'm sure it would make for longer games, however and adjacent can be long to begin with.

[greenoaks]

a quick search of active games shows Chained with 11,687; Unlimited with 4,932 and Adjacent with only 1,939 active games.

[agentcom]

Your point being that adjacent is under-played? I'm not sure that almost 2,000 active games proves that point. There are 3222 1v1 standard games and "only" 685 quads games. Does that mean we should change how quads works? No. It's just another game option.

[The Voice]

As an additional option, I'm all for it. Needless to say I'm a fan of the current adjacent, however, being that 42% of my nearly 4,000 games played have been on adjacent.

[DoomYoshi]

Adjacent is the game, chained is some kind of freakshow.

[rishaed]

Kind of interesting... If you were going to do this for adjacent, why not for chained too?

Because then it would be more than like Unlimited. Unless I accidently for the wrong number of troops from an area I will only be using 1 reinforcement from that area.

[rishaed]

Sry i misunderstood the OP . However I do think that it is a good suggestion.

[Eddygp]

I like adjacent, fog and trench games, being the most similar to real life settings. I do not know if this idea would be interesting, but I would give it some tries, and, who knows, it might be quite interesting. So I support it as an extra game setting, but not to replace current adjacent option.

[Funkyterrance]

I like adjacent, fog and trench games, being the most similar to real life settings. I do not know if this idea would be interesting, but I would give it some tries, and, who knows, it might be quite interesting. So I support it as an extra game setting, but not to replace current adjacent option.

I would think that this suggestion is probably the closest to real life if you are going to look at it that way. In real life you can fort adjacently on all of your lines, not just one.

[Swifte]

I like adjacent, fog and trench games, being the most similar to real life settings. I do not know if this idea would be interesting, but I would give it some tries, and, who knows, it might be quite interesting. So I support it as an extra game setting, but not to replace current adjacent option.

I would think that this suggestion is probably the closest to real life if you are going to look at it that way. In real life you can fort adjacently on all of your lines, not just one.

How do you mean 'in real life'. Like... in a war? or the game of Risk? because here are the rules of Risk i'm familiar with:

FORTIFYING YOUR POSITION

To fortify your position, move as many armies as you’d like from one (and only one) of your territories into one (and only one) of your adjacent territories. Remember to move troops towards borders where they can help in an attack! In moving your armies from one territory to another, you must leave at least one army behind.

[Funkyterrance]

I like adjacent, fog and trench games, being the most similar to real life settings. I do not know if this idea would be interesting, but I would give it some tries, and, who knows, it might be quite interesting. So I support it as an extra game setting, but not to replace current adjacent option.

I would think that this suggestion is probably the closest to real life if you are going to look at it that way. In real life you can fort adjacently on all of your lines, not just one.

How do you mean 'in real life'. Like... in a war? or the game of Risk? because here are the rules of Risk i'm familiar with:

FORTIFYING YOUR POSITION

To fortify your position, move as many armies as you’d like from one (and only one) of your territories into one (and only one) of your adjacent territories. Remember to move troops towards borders where they can help in an attack! In moving your armies from one territory to another, you must leave at least one army behind.

Lol yeah I thought he was referring to real as in war. I didn't consider that he might have meant the board game.