Fortify through neutral countries *Rejected*

by **reverend_kyle** on Sat Oct 07, 2006 3:03 am

The only similar thing on lacks to do list I saw was fort through team member so I figured I'd post it
* Suggestion Idea: Fort through neutral countries
* Specifics:You can fort through the neutral countries as its not like youre forting through an enemy and it makes it fair for everyone
* Why it is needed:to help condense armies

* Priority** (1-5): 4

by **Master Bush** on Sat Oct 07, 2006 3:05 am

I think cause they are neutral, you should have to pay to go through it. Like for every 5 men you fort through, you lose 1 as payment.

by **ZawBanjito** on Sat Oct 07, 2006 3:06 am

reverend_kyle wrote: * Specifics:You can fort through the neutral countries as its not like youre forting through an enemy and it makes it fair for everyone

It's not like you're forting through an ally either... If you can fort through the things, why have them at all?

by **reverend_kyle** on Sat Oct 07, 2006 3:18 am

ZawBanjito wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote: * Specifics:You can fort through the neutral countries as its not like youre forting through an enemy and it makes it fair for everyone

It's not like you're forting through an ally either... If you can fort through the things, why have them at all?

So players dont have an uneven number of armies.. thats the only purpose I see for them

by **gavin_sidhu** on Sat Oct 07, 2006 3:31 am

reverend_kyle wrote:
ZawBanjito wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote: * Specifics:You can fort through the neutral countries as its not like youre forting through an enemy and it makes it fair for everyone

It's not like you're forting through an ally either... If you can fort through the things, why have them at all?

So players dont have an uneven number of armies.. thats the only purpose I see for them

u mean countries right? Dont like the idea much, how often do you have a neutral country blocking the conections between your countries (unless there are deadbeats)? It would remove the will to attack these neutral countries.

by **reverend_kyle** on Sat Oct 07, 2006 3:34 am

gavin_sidhu wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote:
ZawBanjito wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote: * Specifics:You can fort through the neutral countries as its not like youre forting through an enemy and it makes it fair for everyone

It's not like you're forting through an ally either... If you can fort through the things, why have them at all?

So players dont have an uneven number of armies.. thats the only purpose I see for them
u mean countries right? Dont like the idea much, how often do you have a neutral country blocking the conections between your countries (unless there are deadbeats)? It would remove the will to attack these neutral countries.

You still have to go through them if you are fortifying outside territories into your continents.. and this just makes people deadbeating so much more annoying because they will have nine guys blocking your path to the rest of your territories and it would be like move.

by **Ishiro** on Sat Oct 07, 2006 5:11 am

This is world domination... you don't fortify through neutral countries, you defeat them. Man up and fight.

by **zip_disk** on Sat Oct 07, 2006 5:47 am

This idea is not completely thought out. You want the defensive benefits of a neutral country without any of the maneuvering costs?

Say you had 20 armies on Indonesia and an opponent deadbeated leaving 20 armies on Siam. With the rule change you could just take India or China and leave your country protected by the neutrals while you transfer your armies away to attack elsewhere.

Your reasoning for the change is not that great either. I don't see why you should be rewarded because someone deadbeated when in a normal game you wouldn't be. Deadbeating usually favors some players over others, making the benefits even greater by removing a cost hardly makes it fairer.

The only solution would be to allow enemy forces to move through neutral countries freely as well when attacking. Then what would the point of neutral countries be in the first place?

by **ZawBanjito** on Sat Oct 07, 2006 8:22 am

reverend_kyle wrote:So players dont have an uneven number of armies.. thats the only purpose I see for them

Too true too true. I was trying to come up with some sort of reason so I didn't have to flatly come out and say that this is a poor solution to a non-existant problem. If it ain't broke, why buy yourself a crowbar and start whacking?

by **Pedronicus** on Sat Oct 07, 2006 8:33 am

ZawBanjito wrote:
reverend_kyle wrote:A load of old bollox.... la la la...

start whacking off in the toolshed

Well said Zaw!

by **jay_a2j** on Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:02 am

reverend_kyle wrote: * Suggestion Idea: Fort through neutral countries

They are neutral for a reason. They don't want to get involed in the war or take sides. Switzerland was neutral in WWII, If they had allowed allies to move through it, Germany would have no doubt addressed this.

Movement through a neutral country renders that country NON-NEUTRAL.