Moderator: Community Team
nester wrote:As it is no player can end one round and start the next round in free-style.
This should be extended to not allow the player who ends the round to play until at least 1 other player has finished thier starting turn in the next round.
With 6 people playing the game will be virtually unchanged, but in the final rounds where it is only 2 people it becomes sequencial.
IMHO this will allow a much faster game with the best of both worlds.
garionoldwolf wrote:I'd say if your gonna make it that way, I suggest making it an option. Sort of how we used to have the option of double turns allowed, which I still miss.
Gengoldy wrote:Of all the games I've played, and there have been some poor sports and cursing players out there, you are by far the lowest and with the least class.
calkid wrote:what was suggested was a so-called freesytyle/sequential play. the whole point in freestyle is to allow 3 players on at the same time per round. if you illiminate this by allowing one person to finish his turn first because you want to prohibit the last person to take his turn right away in the next round(after waiting for someone to start their turn), then it's not really freestyle anymore. IN FACT even right now it isn't true free stayle when someone has to wait for another to start their turn in the next round, but the change was a compromise so that the turns would go quicker without everyone having the same strategy.
either you like freestye or you don't. if you do, great! if you don't, don't suggest turning it in to a sequential/freestyle game.
Shouldn't missing your turn be the same as taking it? Then you shouldn't be able to start the next round.
nester wrote:As it is no player can end one round and start the next round in free-style.
This should be extended to not allow the player who ends the round to play until at least 1 other player has finished thier starting turn in the next round.
With 6 people playing the game will be virtually unchanged, but in the final rounds where it is only 2 people it becomes sequencial.
IMHO this will allow a much faster game with the best of both worlds.
garionoldwolf wrote:I'd say if your gonna make it that way, I suggest making it an option. Sort of how we used to have the option of double turns allowed, which I still miss.
Stoney229 wrote:I have also enjoyed some super-speed, super-real-time games: freestyle (and double-turn back when it was allowed) games where all players take their turns simultaneously throughout the game... it is definitely a very different game from RISK, but is still a lot of fun and somewhat simulates Real-Time Strategy games without the complicated graphics.
SirSebstar wrote:Propably very obvious
But what is it is down to a two player game? and the person starting first does not take his turn till that last possible hour (and ends the last possible minute) it would kinda suck
Return to Archived Suggestions
Users browsing this forum: No registered users