Moderator: Community Team
Postby mibi on Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:37 pm
It seems like the most realistic fortification method would be to combine adjacent and unlimited. So each turn each country with more than one army can make ONE adjacent fortification. It seams silly to have only one army to make one move. It also seems silly to have armies fly across the map in unlimited fortification.
Unlimited + Adjacent would provide the best mix of realism and strategy I think.
colton24 wrote:I'm in.The reason I haven't got em all is cause I was sick the past three days
Mr. Squirrel wrote:pmchugh wrote:BUMP- one more fool needed
One fool reporting for duty!
Is there some kind of mercy rule? I had 278 armies on a territory and my opponent had 1 on an adjacent territory. I just randomly won. Their name was crossed and they still had the territory.
slowreactor wrote:I can't seem to find the user guide or any other options for the clickables. The only thing I can do is whatever is available directly on the map. Can anyone help please?
hwhrhett wrote:apwessen and mrlucky were playing as a team, in the game i played with them as well, mr lucky was using all his armies to block me from attacking apwessen in asia, the game was over in only 4 rounds because they systematically removed their rivals.
Mr Changsha wrote:I have found that freestlye rewards the player who can literally sit at their computer (or relatively near it) for a couple of weeks. Those that have a life however, are going to be punished for it, at least on 2.1.
I've played two freestlye 2.1 games (yeah, noobie I know) and won them both, yet I would happily admit that the wins came about because I had the time to keep checking my computer and pouncing at the right points.
How people could play numerous freestyle games, win a fair percentage, and still maintain a marriage, job or social life is a little beyond me.
(Maybe they just don't?)
Back to work for me now, so back to only playing sequential. I suspect that sequential will in the end reward the better overall player...my win record on sequential games would bear this out.
Speed freestyle??? I'm too old, too stupid and certainly too slow.
Master Fenrir wrote:Fireside Poet wrote:[game]5200310[/game] - Cairn's Coral Coast/6 Player/Standard/Escalating/Chained/Sunny
The usual password, but not always the usual crowd. Enjoy!neanderpaul14 wrote:Canada 6-player: Escalating, Sequential, No-fog, Chained:
[game]5207908[/game]
[game]5207909[/game]
Standard Password
I'd like to request the passwords for these games, please.
Army of GOD wrote:Title makes this pretty self-explanatory...I hope.
Army of GOD wrote:7 is SO ugly. It makes me cry sometimes...
On the 4th of July 2006 MeDeFe wrote:I'm just playing a sequential game where two people are deadbeating right from the start because they started out with bad holdings.
As it is, deadbeats don't lose anything and the worst you can do to them is give them negative feedback, but how about this:
People who deadbeat from the start of a game lose points, too. These are distributed among ALL the other players in the game, not just to the winner(s).
It's only an idea I just had but I feel that would take care of deadbeating in no time at all.
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
Serbia Mon Jan 15, 2007 11:31 am wrote:I'm going with the Patriots. Partly because I think Indy's going to choke, and by Indy, I mean mostly Manning. In fact, had the Colts D played like they played all season, they wouldn't have gotten by Baltimore. I'd like to see the Saints win, because they haven't yet, and while I think they'll get by the Bears, I just think that if the Pats do make it to the Super Bowl, they'll win it for the fourth time. I mean really, was anyone really surprised that Brady led the team on that scoring drive at the end of the first half, and then again in the fourth, trailing by 8? Sure, he got a HUGE break with that interception-fumble-recovery play, but given the second chance, he made it happen again.
saxitoxin wrote:Serbia is a RUDE DUDE
may not be a PRUDE, but he's gotta 'TUDE
might not be LEWD, but he's gonna get BOOED
RUDE
Timminz wrote:I'm not sure if this is the proper thread for this complaint. I have just experienced, what I consider to be, an abuse of the team mate deadbeat issue. playing a 4 player doubles game, we were in the lead very slightly. The other team then missed 2 turns each and the first player missed his third turn and was kicked out, his team mate then returned to play his next turn and received triple the amount of armies he was entitled to (having missed 2 rounds). The problem with this is that he had just inherited all of his team mates territories, and therefore received triple the amount of armies based on approximately double the amount of territories(his and his team mate's). This seems like a really bad loophole in the rules. Could someone please explain to me why this is acceptable, or if it will be fixed.
lord voldemort wrote:Skittles! wrote:Getting a n00b to beat Wrestler - Not hard
Getting Wrestler to admit he's the most hated on this site - Priceless
touche...very nice
JoshyBoy wrote:Hey this is my first post on the forum!
[game]2626124[/game]
I attacked from Kentucky to Virginia to eliminate PhatJoey from the game and take his cards. This was 11 or 10 v 1 and I lost them ALL!
Is this a bug? Coz now I'm screwed in this game! (Well at least I think I am
lol not meaning to complain just asking for it to be checked out!
drunkmonkey wrote:I honestly wonder why anyone becomes a mod on this site. You're the whiniest bunch of players imaginable.
Ron Burgundy wrote:Why don't you go back to your home on Whore Island?
72o wrote:I don't know if this has been proposed before, but is it possible/has someone thought about allowing players to select their drops, similar to how the original board game is played?
I think this would be great in speed games, and make them more challenging and less about lucky drops. The dice already introduce a certain amount of luck (too much/too little is infinitely debatable), in my opinion controlling the drops introduces a new level of skill into the game.
)AndyDufresne wrote:Marvaddin wrote:Really, I think your map lacks some balance...
Russia, for example, includes 4 countries, but 3 are border countries, so 2 armies is a small bonus. Same with Scandinavia, 5 countries, but 4 in the borders and at least 7 countries to attack it, and for a bonus of 3 armies. Germany is a lost continent, because is the shorter route to any attack, and its almost impossible to hold. I see, the presence of Africa and Middle East helps to increase attack routes, but not as would be good.
I'd agree with your statement of Germany is a lost continent, though I would not say that is exactly a bad thing. I think with this map how it is, (though I whole heartedly agree on some of the value adjustments) would be a wonderful map full of excitement and battles galore. Obviously Germany would be the center for many battles; an obvious stomping ground for any army looking to conquer the world. It would not be held right away, like Africa or some of the others might, but this would help increase the conflict of the map. If no one wanted Germany there would be many more frantic skirmishes between foes looking to capture a continent. I think the way this Europe map is laid out, for the most part, is not just a regular risk map. It seems more like a "Frenzy Risk" map, if there is such a thing. A map that will guarantee battles and conflicts a plenty.
--Andy Dufresne
I will do a 2v2 with any you of wimps; and I will dominate you. You will be destroyed by my hand of devout justice! This is a slap in the face, good sirs. I do hope it stings.
Yours Truly,
BIgBallinStalin
finchboy wrote:Never put Jam on a magnet, never put a sock in a toaster, eating snow is silly, whatever colour it is.
targetman377 wrote:bedub1 wrote:Can I call them "American Africans"? Cause honestly....if they were born here in the US...then America needs to come first.
lol thats great
targetman377 wrote:targetman377 wrote:bedub1 wrote:Can I call them "American Africans"? Cause honestly....if they were born here in the US...then America needs to come first.
lol thats great
saxitoxin wrote:Serbia is a RUDE DUDE
may not be a PRUDE, but he's gotta 'TUDE
might not be LEWD, but he's gonna get BOOED
RUDE
