SUBJECT: “Staggered Start” Game Option

[Abyss24]

Concise Description:
The player to take the first turn in a game cannot attack.

Specifics/Details:
• The first player to take a turn in this type of game will be able to deploy and fortify but will NOT be able to make an attack.
• This applies only to the very first turn taken in the game—thereafter all game play will proceed normally according to the specific game options selected

How this will benefit the site:
• Adding this option may mitigate the advantage conferred upon the player who makes the opening move.
• In many games, the player or team to go second is forced to react rather than initiate.
• It may mitigate the advantage conferred by a bad drop.
• It could be a fun new game option.

[Dukasaur]

I like it.

[HitRed]

I use this and recommend it in clan games. Turning 3 territories into stacks of four troops are real roadblocks. I call it 'punting' as there are no attacks and no spoils. Your senerio would be mandated so that would be different.

Best Originial idea so 5 stars to you

HitRed

[.SCuD.]

I've often thought about this, as going first can be such a big advantage. Your idea is good.

The other option is to receive up to half your deploy on turn one (so half for even numbers, or just under for odd, so 1 for 3, 2, for 5 etc)

Plenty of times I've played my first turn and thought "well, that's that game won" and they haven't even had a move!"

[Jdsizzleslice]

A counter to this argument could be that the first turn has no turn to counteract a very good drop for the second turn. The second turn essentially becomes the first turn.

[Dukasaur]

While I personally do like the suggestion, I have to honestly say this cannot be implemented. A very similar suggestion was on the verge of implementation in 2013, but the webmaster asked to Suggestions Team (yes, we had one back then) to do a community poll, and the poll went overwhelmingly against the suggestion.

Unfortunately with the Great Forum Deletion last year all old poll results are lost, but I think it was something like 3 to 1 against. Our membership is generally very resistant to change...

You can read the old thread here:
https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=197642

As you can see, the comments are extremely negative. While I still like the idea, and so do a number of other people, it is unlikely that the webmaster would agree to reopen the issue. Once he's been burned by a negative community reaction like that, he's rarely willing to try again.