sully800 wrote:It's a decent idea but I think we are beginning to run into too many choices.
You can play with 3, 4, 5, or 6 people. Any of 22 (and growing) maps).. Standard, Terminator, Doubles or Triples (and some people want to add old style doubles and triples) Freestyle or Sequential Escalating Flat or No cards Chained Adjacent or Unlimited Public or Private.
Thats currently 12,672 combinations of game setups. Won't we ever have enough??
I know that choice is good but not everything can be an option. If you constantly add more choices it just clutters the screen when you're trying to join a game, and could make it difficult for you to find a kind that you like.
i think if somebody misses a turn they shouldn;t get to keep their armies from the turn they missed it doesn;t make sense that someone can wait everybody out and drag the game on just to come in after everybody else has battled it out. does anybody agree with me.
This has been discussed time and time again this is probally the 20th time this has been a thread.. LACK is adament about getting your armys for missed turns as real life sometimes dose happen
missing a turn is a new strategy now...so use it to your advantage. I've decided its my turn to go on vacation...lmao. What a stupid rule...theres got to be a better way?
Lets make a new CC option where if you pick one option it doesn't give you the armies but the other will. (messed up post but I think you get what I am saying.)
this is going on in a game im playing now ....this person has missed 5 turns out of 14 rounds so i just mark it under neg remarks , which i read when signing up for new games (that way people know upfront not to join their games , and if they join behind you, you ll know upfront how to play them)
I dont agree with the multiply armies rule it gives the player who misses a turn a distinct advantage over other player in the game and pretty much screws up a game. See game #61918 for case in point. This game was going great and then SMOKINAWAY missed a turn and got multiple armies and pretty much ran amok on the board. I don't understand this rule and think that it should be taken off. It is very easy for someone to miss a turn on purpose and get a crap load of armies next turn to annilhate the board. PLEASE PLEASE do something about this particular rule. Cap the armies or just get rid of this rule altogether. It is a very unfair rule.
spiesr wrote:They still get the same amout of armies, just all on the turn they play, they could do the same thing by just not attacking.
So why don't they do that then instead of intentionaly missing a turn? this is what i said in another post:
cramill wrote:I do not like the multiplying of armies if you miss a turn. Sure, it may be fair for people who miss a turn accidentaly (they were too busy with more importaint stuff, or they were away from a computer or internet for a while) but I don't think people should be able to skip a turn intentionaly and then get the multiplied armies their next turn. They should only get the armies they deserve for one turn - without multiplication. Sure, it may be too hard to tell if someone accidentally missed a turn or did it on purpose, so I think it should be done away with alltogether. (And tough luck to people who miss turns accidentally.)
Missing a turn is not a distinct advantage... If the other players allow it to be, that's their fault.
How it work... lets say in a traditional game, they hold the US, normally worth 5 bonus armies... but they miss a turn, this is gives everyone another chance to break the player's hold on the US.. if they do, when they get back they get 0 bonus armies, despite the fact that they held it for the turn they missed. What should have been 3+5 for one turn and then either 3 or 3+5 for the next is now 3*2. Sure, they get 6 armies in one turn, but if he'd actually showed up and played, he would have gotten 8.
Plus, he gets no card for the turn he missed.
There really is no advantage to missing a turn unless the rest of the players let it happen.
But, in a game with no cards, it could be sometimes benificial to skip a turn. And if you have a hold on a continent that even has a 2 or 3 bounus and you are pretty confident that no one will be able to take any part of your continent (because you know they wont get many reinforcements because there are no cards) you could skip your turn and get a whole lot at once and do some unfair unexpected damage. Even though they still are getting the same # of reinforcements that they would have if they had taken their turn, i think it is more fair that they shouldnt be able to do this. If they don't want to attack, instead of skipping a turn they should place their armies on their turn that they deserve them, not all at once to gain an unfair advantage.
Also, intentionaly skipping a turn slows down the game - which a lot people do not like.
OMG, just pm lack, he will give you a answer then you dont have to make yet another thread about this toppic, and it wont be changed it had been dissmissed 1000000's of times.
wcaclimbing wrote:Because stupid people like you dont expect it.
Woah, hey now, this isnt a flame thread.
I think I am begining to see everyones point. There realy isnt too much of an advantage in intentionaly skipping a turn (so now I don't think there should be a change to the rule), but I still think its stupid to intentionaly skip turns.
Yeah the only advantage of skipping a turn is it makes you appear a bit weaker than you are, because you don't have the armies on the board until you place them in one big go. However a decent player will be able to keep track of how many armies you can add, and just treat it as though the armies from the previous turn are already on the board (and in your mind place them in whatever position hurts you the most). That way when they are added you can't be surprised...at least not in a bad way. It might be a pleasant surprise to see your opponent place the men in a position that doesn't hurt you.
