Allow fortification of neutral territories

[IcePack]

Interesting

[x-raider]

Nice, simple, interesting.

[greenoaks]

i don't like it.

they are your troops, if they enter another territory not controlled by yourself or your allies it is to attack

FULL STOP

[waltero]

Attack Attack ATTACK!!! Bit of a war monger. Nothing for Defense, just Attack. I can see many useful reasons why a guy should be able to reinforce Neutrals.
If they enter a territory, why can it not be for defense? You are more than welcome to attack them at any time.

Just think of a Poland game...everybody beefs up PAF...would make for a long game.
If it helps you to understand...just think of them as your allies while you are placing units on them. And if you don't like it don't use it.
Might not make these games so decisive. Make for some funny team games. Deploy units right in the middle of somebodies (soon to be)
Controlled Region.
Might add an interesting aspect to a nuclear games

Might be an OK option to have anyway.
I think it would be a real benefit to the game.

[greenoaks]

Attack Attack ATTACK!!! Bit of a war monger. Nothing for Defense, just Attack. I can see many useful reasons why a guy should be able to reinforce Neutrals.
If they enter a territory, why can it not be for defense? You are more than welcome to attack them at any time.

Just think of a Poland game...everybody beefs up PAF...would make for a long game.
If it helps you to understand...just think of them as your allies while you are placing units on them. And if you don't like it don't use it.
Might not make these games so decisive. Make for some funny team games. Deploy units right in the middle of somebodies (soon to be)
Controlled Region.
Might add an interesting aspect to a nuclear games

Might be an OK option to have anyway.
I think it would be a real benefit to the game.

if you want to defend, deploy on yourself. if you want to attack, deploy on yourself.

[Extreme Ways]

Attack Attack ATTACK!!! Bit of a war monger. Nothing for Defense, just Attack. I can see many useful reasons why a guy should be able to reinforce Neutrals.
If they enter a territory, why can it not be for defense? You are more than welcome to attack them at any time.

Just think of a Poland game...everybody beefs up PAF...would make for a long game.
If it helps you to understand...just think of them as your allies while you are placing units on them. And if you don't like it don't use it.
Might not make these games so decisive. Make for some funny team games. Deploy units right in the middle of somebodies (soon to be)
Controlled Region.
Might add an interesting aspect to a nuclear games

Might be an OK option to have anyway.
I think it would be a real benefit to the game.

And what about FOW? Would you see where the neutrals are? And what if you want your troops back? If you can reinforce neutrals, why stop there and implement forting other players? Sorry, afwul idea.

[Jdsizzleslice]

Seems kool, but I don't think this would necessarily be liked, because then anyone can fort. And what happens when you get into a Freestyle game? What dictates who forts the neutral?

[thehippo8]

Seems kool, but I don't think this would necessarily be liked, because then anyone can fort. And what happens when you get into a Freestyle game? What dictates who forts the neutral?

First in first served.

[waltero]

It's an Idea! What in the world are you guys Talking about??? If you roll a 6 on one di while the territory has six neutral units on it and there is a full moon out and a black cat runs across the road, what will happen to those units you just dropped on a Neutral territory?
The same thing that happens in all other Game boards.

You already ''can'' fort other players.
Why would you see Neutral units in FOW games?
''And what if you want your troops Back'' Well maybe you just declare it in game chat, So everybody can laugh at you and Call you a loser ;-P
Maybe you don't want to defend yourself...but rather a territory that nobody controls as to keep or delay another player from Controlling it.

This is a basic game.
I think the more options you have the better.
It is good that Conquers Club took Risk and made it better...But it is still risk.
If you want to keep it the same old game, Fine.

Not every board is the same. Some boards would probably do OK with this others might not.
Could not remember, but I do think I recall a player that dropped a game, all his units go Neutral?

I don't have all the answers. I do have some Ideas.

I still think this game should utilize card play a bit more. A LOT MORE!

Right now it is only a (fun) game of Dice. Balance the game a bit with options and center on Strategy...Not a whole lot of Strategy in Risk.

All in all I do not think reinforcing neutrals will do much for the game.
Won't know until you try.

[greenoaks]

All in all I do not think reinforcing neutrals will do much for the game.

even the op doesn't think much of this suggestion.

move this to rejected.

[waltero]

Why would anybody Presume to tell somebody what they should or should not be allowed to do with there units?

Might not be a great idea. Just an idea to possibly bring more play to the table.

Not sure why anybody would be ''totally'' opposed to this Idea? Might be afraid it would open up new Strategy.

A few more options might be nice

[waltero]

Quote

''if you want to defend, deploy on yourself. if you want to attack, deploy on yourself''
''they are your troops, if they enter another territory not controlled by yourself or your allies it is to attack''


Why limit your units,
And the ability to implement new strategies

The more Neutrals interact with the game... then I think the players should be able to interact with the Neutrals.

Regenerating Neutrals for instance.
Neutrals are not necessarily Neutral in some games.

Neutrals play a vital role in Kings court II.
Trebuchet for one...are not Neutral!
They are for enemy control (most of the time).

I haven't had the chance to experiment with them..but I do believe they revert back to normal at the beginning of the players turn (player who conquered it).
Not sure if anything happens to it if it is not fully Conquered (partially weakened).

Good idea bad idea Don't really know. Is it Difficult to implement this in a game board? Don't see the harm in trying it out.
Might give a person who has nothing to lose something to do in a game rather then up and leave.

Not sure It would be used or useful...but it would be nice to have the option

[Extreme Ways]

It's an Idea! What in the world are you guys Talking about??? If you roll a 6 on one di while the territory has six neutral units on it and there is a full moon out and a black cat runs across the road, what will happen to those units you just dropped on a Neutral territory?
The same thing that happens in all other Game boards.

You already ''can'' fort other players.
Why would you see Neutral units in FOW games?
''And what if you want your troops Back'' Well maybe you just declare it in game chat, So everybody can laugh at you and Call you a loser ;-P
Maybe you don't want to defend yourself...but rather a territory that nobody controls as to keep or delay another player from Controlling it.

This is a basic game.
I think the more options you have the better.
It is good that Conquers Club took Risk and made it better...But it is still risk.
If you want to keep it the same old game, Fine.

Not every board is the same. Some boards would probably do OK with this others might not.
Could not remember, but I do think I recall a player that dropped a game, all his units go Neutral?

I don't have all the answers. I do have some Ideas.

I still think this game should utilize card play a bit more. A LOT MORE!

Right now it is only a (fun) game of Dice. Balance the game a bit with options and center on Strategy...Not a whole lot of Strategy in Risk.

All in all I do not think reinforcing neutrals will do much for the game.
Won't know until you try.

I'm just opposed to this idea. CC is already hard to get into when you are a NR with all those maps and features, I don't think reinforcing neutrals would help. And about the forting neutrals in FOW, I thought you also meant you could deploy on neutrals. Then you will have to see them.

[MoB Deadly]

I would ragequit if I was trying to fort a big stack somewhere and accidentally forted a neutral. At least if I make a mistake now, I can move the stack next turn.

[MoB Deadly]

I would ragequit if I was trying to fort a big stack somewhere and accidentally forted a neutral. At least if I make a mistake now, I can move the stack next turn.

u are an idiot, dont make mistakes bro

[Extreme Ways]

I would ragequit if I was trying to fort a big stack somewhere and accidentally forted a neutral. At least if I make a mistake now, I can move the stack next turn.

u are an idiot

^

[thehippo8]

I like this idea and think it should be implemented.

[waltero]

The more Neutrals interact with the game... then I think the players should be able to interact with the Neutrals.

Regenerating Neutrals for instance.
Neutrals are not necessarily Neutral in some games.

Neutrals play a vital role in Kings court II.
Trebuchet for one...are not Neutral!
They are for enemy control (most of the time).

I haven't had the chance to experiment with them..but I do believe they revert back to normal at the beginning of the players turn (player who conquered it).
Not sure if anything happens to it if it is not fully Conquered (partially weakened).

Good idea bad idea Don't really know. Is it Difficult to implement this in a game board? Don't see the harm in trying it out.
Might give a person who has nothing to lose something to do in a game rather then up and leave.

Not sure It would be used or useful...but it would be nice to have the option

[thehippo8]

The effect is that the Neutrals will become an extension of your territory. This would be most interesting when there is one neutral between opposing armies.

[Vartiovuori]

I would ragequit if I was trying to fort a big stack somewhere and accidentally forted a neutral. At least if I make a mistake now, I can move the stack next turn.

u are an idiot, dont make mistakes bro

Says the person who can't even spell "You" or "don't"

[sirgermaine]

This suggestion is a pretty decent one. Have you thought about the ways that it might affect gameplay on various maps? Also are there other threads that have proposed this?

[betiko]

i was confused at first because the term used is not correct. you mean deploy not reinforce right?

[thehippo8]

i was confused at first because the term used is not correct. you mean deploy not reinforce right?

I understood it as reinforce, but deployment ALSO is an idea - maybe a different idea?

[sirgermaine]

I mean, it would make sense if you can do one to be able to do the other.

[greenoaks]

if you give troops to a Neutral territory it ceases to be neutral, especially if more than 1 person's armies are stationed there.