Page 1 of 3
Manual Army Deployment

Posted:
Sat Jan 28, 2006 12:17 pm
by Twill
Hey Lack,
How hard would it be to have an option for creating a game that is "random placement of armies" and/or "manual placement of armies"
So that instead of 3 armies per country we get to choose where to place them or have them randomly distributed throughout the world.
It would add a new dimension to the game.
If you went with manual distribution, then you could have the first turn is only distribution using the same method of army placement that is available now.
The advantage of this is that anyone who does not place their armies in the first turn is automatically dropped for deadbeating and has their men randomly distributed throughout the world as a neutral player...thus solving the problem of 35% 1st move deadbeat players.
As always, just a thought
Twill

Posted:
Mon Jan 30, 2006 1:47 am
by ZawBanjito
Hup! This is a great idea! Especially for games of 5 or 6 players, where early placement is random and frustratingly influential on the early game, and where you are practically guaranteed at least one drop out.
I support this message.

Posted:
Mon Jan 30, 2006 11:07 am
by lackattack
This is an intersting idea that I thought about myself (well, the manual placing at least). Not high priority, but I could add this down the line...
manual posting

Posted:
Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:56 am
by cenamom
I totally agree. Manual posting lets you set up your armies in a position you wish to go bypassing the frustration of only one fortification which especially takes forever in the USA game.
Thanks

Posted:
Wed Apr 05, 2006 10:38 am
by SMITH197
I know this topic has been dead for a while, but it struck me today that we can't manually place armies and i though now we have alot more members than we did when this thread was started, maybe we can get some support for getting Lack to program it in. What do you think?

Posted:
Wed Apr 05, 2006 11:21 am
by SprCobra
While your armeis were being transported to the abttle feild the chinooks blades collided with each other and the transporter planes engines malfuntions you had to parachute before the plane crashed and all the ehavy EQ was destroyed but some AA guns survived withthose you destroyed the enemys airborne divisions making it a ground vicious grunt fight and everyoens armies were scattered---------DOUBLES-------------------------------But then you found the leader of a fellow army and made an alaicne to ruel thew world the others eladers in fear of being crushed also teamed up
You manual placment is messed up the end

Posted:
Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:21 pm
by SMITH197
....

.....

Posted:
Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:21 pm
by Marvaddin
Manual placement? I totally disagree. You need place 1 army each time, then wait other players. This is the right way, because other way who place armies later will have a great advantage. It is boring, and in actual situation it can last for weeks. Please dont do it, lack.

Posted:
Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:32 pm
by SMITH197
I had thought the same thing and i understand that as it stands now, it would take forever. But if we ever get time limit options, we might be able to create realtime games, then it would be do-able.
Deployment

Posted:
Sun Apr 30, 2006 6:50 pm
by nogreasyhippies
We need an option of deploying at the start on the countries we want, like a certain tactical board game i could mention, instead of having 3 on each.

Posted:
Sun Apr 30, 2006 6:59 pm
by Hoff
yes i agree, i would love this option. But just imagine how long a game like that would take. But i guess thats why and option for it would be nice.

Posted:
Sun Apr 30, 2006 8:37 pm
by Jota
Hmm. I wonder if there could be a compromise of some sort. Like, you can place several deployments' worth at a time, but maybe they can't be touching each other (to prevent someone from claiming 75% of Oceania on the first deployment turn). It'd be faster than deploying one at a time, although it might still be too slow to be practical.

Posted:
Sun Apr 30, 2006 8:48 pm
by freakshow
frankly I'd rather see a drop game option first. that way if I ended up in a game like this acidently I could get the hell out.

Posted:
Tue May 02, 2006 12:11 pm
by nogreasyhippies
Its just I come from a real-world risk playing background, and am craving the real world rules, sure it would take a long time, but thats the beauty of risk, its not a kids game.

Posted:
Tue May 02, 2006 12:17 pm
by Pristella
It does have it's beauty, especially if played in rather fast realtime sequential version... Lalala!

Posted:
Tue May 02, 2006 2:17 pm
by Hoff
I really think an option for this would be AMAZING. ha

Posted:
Tue May 02, 2006 6:28 pm
by Banana Stomper
Just a personal opinion. I know other people might like it, but i wouldn't really want to spend the time placing all sorts of troops. With three on each, it keeps things interesting. I know it would only be an option, but i for one would probably avoid using it.

Posted:
Tue May 02, 2006 6:34 pm
by HighBorn
i enjoy the fact theres no placeing... time for one...

Posted:
Tue May 02, 2006 7:52 pm
by Red Army
This definately should be a game option - only don't allow people to start conquering before everyone has placed their men.

Posted:
Tue May 02, 2006 8:39 pm
by freakshow
Red Army wrote:This definately should be a game option - only don't allow people to start conquering before everyone has placed their men.
yeah I'd be all for adding it and I might actually play a game with it, but it should only be in sequential games.

Posted:
Tue May 02, 2006 8:55 pm
by Fieryo
you could install a 5 minute time limit on deployment, so as to prevent newbs from taking all night or something

Posted:
Tue May 02, 2006 9:19 pm
by nhulbert
Another nice improvement to deployment would be to change how it is gone about. Say every country is a link, and you can click it, and a little box pops up asking how many armies you want to deploy on that country. Something to that effect... That's the simplest way I could think of going about making deployment easier, so it's not so darn important to know the name of every little country, especially since it's so hard to read them sometimes.

Posted:
Wed May 03, 2006 12:58 am
by Hoff
nhulbert wrote:Another nice improvement to deployment would be to change how it is gone about. Say every country is a link, and you can click it, and a little box pops up asking how many armies you want to deploy on that country. Something to that effect... That's the simplest way I could think of going about making deployment easier, so it's not so darn important to know the name of every little country, especially since it's so hard to read them sometimes.
The problem with that is that part of the strategy behind deployment is seeing how you enemy is building up. And if they can dump 20 men on one counrty at once gets rid of alot of the strategy that makes deploying one at a time so good.

Posted:
Wed May 03, 2006 7:26 am
by nhulbert
III'm, not, sure, what you're talking about... I don't think you got what I meant out of what I said. The only thing that would be different is deploying armies would be easier... So it would be less painful and less of a strain looking at every little country's name because one would be able to click on the country he(/she) wants armies on, and it would ask how many you want to put on there. There's nothing strategic or nice about the way it is now in my opinion...

Posted:
Wed May 03, 2006 11:25 am
by qeee1
I think the only way it would work is if you placed all your 20 armies or whatever in one go. I don't think the one army each at a time is feasible here on CC.