Conquer Club

Concise description:
Troops get XP for successfully conquering or defending territories.

When the XP threshold is reached, troops raise to the next level. This will affect combat, as dice rolls get slightly modified chances per level, according to that table



The left table are the chances to get each dice result depending on the XP level. As you can see, in level 1 all the results have 30/180=1/6, like in a normal dice. As levels go up the three lower results get decremented odds in favour of the three upper results.

The right table are the XP needed for each level. Each level needs 1.2 times the XP needed for the last level. No levels beyond 25.

Specifics/Details:
When a stack wins a battle, the stack earns XP according to the following formula:

XP won = Killed troops * Losing army XP level / Winning army XP level.

A stack wins a battle when it conquers a territory or when a player attacks the territory the stack is occupiying but finishes the turn without being able to conquer it.

The XP are effective at the end of the player's turn for attacks (to avoid blitz abuse) and at the begining of the player for defenses (so everybody can attack defenders of the same level).

Implementation:
Each stack has a total XP value, then the effective XP is obtained by dividing this global XP by troops in the stack. When troops are killed, each killed troop takes its share of XP upon dying. When a stack is split, points are split accordingly. The total XP value is not displayed, but is stored internally to make calculations a lot more easy.

The effect of this implementation works in a way that fresh troops reduce stack's XP level, as new troops come without XP.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• Introduces a new layer of strategy as high XP makes you win when both players get the same number in the dice.
• Opens the door to XML tags that allow a territory to provide XP per turn (some sort of academy).

So the troops get better with experience? How would you account for differences like reinforcements?

I like the idea. Brings us one step closer to real wargames.

@koontz: one way to deal with reinforcements is to just deal with them as a dilution of the talent pool. So, if you have 100 troops and they are at a strength of 1.1 due to experience, and you add 25 new untrained troops, your 125 troops now have only 1.08 experience.

Sorry for the late reply. I tried to focus on R&C as much as possible, so I postponed answering here.

The reinforcements part would be dealt as Dukasaur says. That's a lot simpler that tracking XP for each individual soldier, but the beauty of the solution is that the final result is almost the same. I'll give an example:

Let's suppose that we have 100 troops with 110 XP. Behind the curtain what we really have is a stack of 11,000 XP and 110 troops, and when the displayed XP is calculated, the result is 11,000/100=110XP, level 6.

If we add 100 more troops, we still have 11,000 XP but 200 troops, and the displayed XP becomes 11,000/200=55XP, level 5.

If we split that original stack of 100 in two equal stacks, we would have two stacks of 5,500 XP and 50 troops each.

All this is internal implementation. The player would not be bothered with all those calculations. The only thing the player would see is that mixing troops averages the XP for the whole stack. So the strategic choice would be between keeping a diminishing stack of elite troops or reinforce the stack even if that reduces its level.

i wonder when cc will be played in 3d and dice will be replaced with ping..


regardless of this comment - i like the idea

Thanks for the answer to my question guys. Next one then. How will I know what type of troops I am attacking?

If I have 10 troops with a 5 for experience, how will I know this but also, will I know that the troops I am going up against are 3 troops with a 30 for experience? Think of it like troops going up against tanks. Less tanks are needed for the win.

koontz1973 wrote:Thanks for the answer to my question guys. Next one then. How will I know what type of troops I am attacking?

If I have 10 troops with a 5 for experience, how will I know this but also, will I know that the troops I am going up against are 3 troops with a 30 for experience? Think of it like troops going up against tanks. Less tanks are needed for the win.

Get yourself a Czech girlfriend. Stop tanks.

Just like the standard in wargames, with a small ^ next to the number. 10^ would be 10 troops of level 2 and so on.

How would this be applicable visually? Most maps barely have space to put in the amount of troops you hold. And the limit should be very sensitive.
In risk, the whole point is the balance due to 3 attacking dice max vs 2 defending dice max and a tie gives the victory to the defense. If the attack has a slight advantage of +0.1 they would win all tie scenarios.

First, allow me to quote myself

OliverFA wrote:PS: I doubt this will be well received, but felt like proposing. It was fun writing it

Second, answering to your questions:

betiko wrote:How would this be applicable visually? Most maps barely have space to put in the amount of troops you hold. And the limit should be very sensitive.

Yes, it would be difficult to add an extra char at some maps. Some others have enough room to fit it even with 100+troops. I have not made statistics about which percentage of maps has a really limited space. My point is, in the unlikely case that there was real will to implement this, a solution would be found. But I suppose that Semi-escalating spoils is more important

betiko wrote:In risk, the whole point is the balance due to 3 attacking dice max vs 2 defending dice max and a tie gives the victory to the defense. If the attack has a slight advantage of +0.1 they would win all tie scenarios.

So, this is Risk again? Well, If we have to become Risk-purists then we should ban almost all the settings, as they are not 100% Risk.

Well, what can I say? The whole point of Troops XP is to win the tie scenarios, to give them a small but important advantadge. To slightly upset the chess-like system without completely nullifying it.

betiko wrote:How would this be applicable visually? Most maps barely have space to put in the amount of troops you hold. And the limit should be very sensitive.
In risk, the whole point is the balance due to 3 attacking dice max vs 2 defending dice max and a tie gives the victory to the defense. If the attack has a slight advantage of +0.1 they would win all tie scenarios.

Well, the whole point of advanced rule-sets is to get away from the childish simplicity of Risk and edge closer to real war games.

Now, as to your main question:
I don't think there's room to put any more information on maps than there already is. In fact, on many maps the mapmakers are already struggling to get tert names and troop circles into the terts.

However, this kind of advanced information could be contained in the Map Inspect window, and that is the reason I think we can now take this suggestion seriously. Before, when you had to get BOB to have Map Inspect, advanced options that required it would have to be rejected, because it's inherently unfair to have information that only people with external aids can see. But now that Map Inspect has been built into the basic UI of the game itself, we can start adding extra stats like this. I think we're only scratching the surface of things which can be done with the floating Map Inspect window.

For the visual and I am not sure if this can be done, but how about a hover over effect. Use the mouse to hover over army numbers and a second number appears.That is your experience level.

Why not do something like; Giving a Extra dice to the player with the Highest troop XP?
Spending a set or something having to acquire it (the die).
Mark the Elite unite. Once it is eliminated (the elite unit) or another player achieves highest XP and pays the spoils (price), elite unit is now his unit.
Of course the unit would only bring a fourth (or third) dice in the battle depending on the number of units he is attacking with.

Example: XP unit and 2 other units=3v2/3dv2d (defender has two units)
XP unit and 4 accompanying units=4d

You could limit XP unit to assault only or defend...or both.

You would not have to bring in Troop XP to make this happen. Maybe a single board game with a building or terit (or what ever) in order for a player to acquire such a unit...you could make it available to all players who reach the goal.

Sorry if I am intruding. Figured this thread is dead and too lazy to post my own thread...plus I not sure if I would be stealing your Idea.

Good day

Thanks for your comments Gweeedo.

Despite it may seem the contrary, I tried to keep my suggestion simple. I wanted to add a new strategy layer without adding too much complication and without substantially altering the game. That's why I suggest the small +0.1 to rolls per level. It's a change that can make the difference by deciding ties, but it won't turn CC into a completely different game. Also, it's in line with already existing games in the industry, such as Hearts of Iron

Your suggestion looks more similar to the generals suggestion that is somewhere in the forum. Perhaps you would want to check it.

Dukasaur wrote:However, this kind of advanced information could be contained in the Map Inspect window, and that is the reason I think we can now take this suggestion seriously. Before, when you had to get BOB to have Map Inspect, advanced options that required it would have to be rejected, because it's inherently unfair to have information that only people with external aids can see. But now that Map Inspect has been built into the basic UI of the game itself, we can start adding extra stats like this. I think we're only scratching the surface of things which can be done with the floating Map Inspect window.

I think that's a brilliant suggestion, as the player who would be using this setting would most probably be using the advanced control panel too. In fact the info could be both in the inspection panel AND in the drop down. Right now it says something like

Assault from Lake Minstello 3 (22) to Lake Minstello 4 (7)

With XP, it would say

Assault from Lake Minstello 3 (22)[3] to Lake Minstello 4 (7)[4]

or even

Assault from Lake Minstello 3 (22)[Lvl 3] to Lake Minstello 4 (7)[Lvl 4]

Making it clear that you are attacking with your 22 level 3 troops to the 7 opponent's level 4 troops.

Is there a way to do this without thinking about fractional die roll results?

Metsfanmax wrote:Is there a way to do this without thinking about fractional die roll results?

What about this?

Code: Select all

Attacker Level - Defender Level     Effect
================================================================================================
           ... ~ -16                +4 to Defender dice rolls (for a final result of 5 to 10)
           -15 ~ -11                +3 to Defender dice rolls (for a final result of 4 to 9)
           -10 ~ -6                 +2 to Defender dice rolls (for a final result of 3 to 8)
            -5 ~ -1                 +1 to Defender dice rolls (for a final result of 2 to 7)
               0                    No effect
            +1 ~ +5                 +1 to Attacker dice rolls (for a final result of 2 to 7)
            +6 ~ +10                +2 to Attacker dice rolls (for a final result of 3 to 8)
           +11 ~ +15                +3 to Attacker dice rolls (for a final result of 4 to 9)
           +16 ~ ...                +4 to Attacker dice rolls (for a final result of 5 to 10)


That's a good start, but it's not functionally symmetrical because of the defender advantage on a tie, I think.

will u get more xp for killing experienced troopers than noobs? ANd the more eexperienced troopers u have bashing heads on noobs shouldnt they get less xp eaxh time since well its not relly a learning experience any more... u get what i mean? finding it hard to explain in english

Must say i love the idea... BUT i think it wwill be hard to implement:) but thats why god inveted mods:) right?

i think that what would make more sense, is that different XP levels give you access to better dice odds through more favourable dice if you attack or defend; i did a suggestion like that before but accessible through spoils, not experience.

example:
level 1 troops attack with 6 sided dice vs 6 sided dice
level 2 troops attack with 7 sided dice vs 7 sided dice
level 2 troops defend with 5 sided dice vs 5 sided dice (there should be a limit in lowering the defense dice... 4 sided dice vs 4 sided dice might be too unballanced as well)

And oliver... seems like you answer me as if I was completely against your idea. Did I say so? I'm giving it a thought and not sureif i think we could make it ballanced or not. Your answer is ridiculous and it seems like you think I'm against any of your suggestions. No risk purist bullcrap here. I'm talking about ballance. The guy who invented the game didn't just come up like that with the dice structure without thinking a lot about it. throwing the idea of changing dice odds needs a big in depth research.

Lord Arioch wrote:will u get more xp for killing experienced troopers than noobs? ANd the more eexperienced troopers u have bashing heads on noobs shouldnt they get less xp eaxh time since well its not relly a learning experience any more... u get what i mean? finding it hard to explain in english

Must say i love the idea... BUT i think it wwill be hard to implement:) but thats why god inveted mods:) right?

Thanks for your comments Arioch. I think you have a good point, and that it can be included in the suggestion while keeping it simple enough so it can be both easily understood and easily implemented. What about this?

Each surviving troop in the winner side gets those XP (rounding down, minimum 1):

XP won = Killed troops * Losing army XP level / Winning army XP level

By "winner side" I mean that:
- If the army is attacking, the territory gets conquered. However, the points are awarded at the end of the attacker's turn to avoid the exploit of making the army more powerful as it advances in a blitz.
- If the army is defending, the territory is conserved by the end of the attacker's turn. However, the points are awarded at the beggining of the defender's turn so each opponent willing to attack the territory faces the same defending troops level for a full round.

So a level 20 army would need to kill 20 level 1 soldiers to get 2 XP, and if a level 1 army is able to bring down the level 20 army, then it deserves 20 points per each soldier killed.

betiko wrote:i think that what would make more sense, is that different XP levels give you access to better dice odds through more favourable dice if you attack or defend; i did a suggestion like that before but accessible through spoils, not experience.

example:
level 1 troops attack with 6 sided dice vs 6 sided dice
level 2 troops attack with 7 sided dice vs 7 sided dice
level 2 troops defend with 5 sided dice vs 5 sided dice (there should be a limit in lowering the defense dice... 4 sided dice vs 4 sided dice might be too unballanced as well)

And oliver... seems like you answer me as if I was completely against your idea. Did I say so? I'm giving it a thought and not sureif i think we could make it ballanced or not. Your answer is ridiculous and it seems like you think I'm against any of your suggestions. No risk purist bullcrap here. I'm talking about ballance. The guy who invented the game didn't just come up like that with the dice structure without thinking a lot about it. throwing the idea of changing dice odds needs a big in depth research.

I am sorry Betiko. I misunderstood your comments. My most sincere apologies.

I think your suggestion about odds makes a lot of sense, and it is easy to be understood, because even if the player does not remember the exact oods, he/she knows that the higher the level the more 6s and the less 1s in the dice. I'll try to work in a logical odds table.

i get all warm and fuzzy in my old dungeons and dragons heart:)

i Think it would be a sweell idea BUT i see a real problem implemnting it on the maps we ahve today...
we mite have to build a whole new set of maps for it cause it is bad to pour in more add ons to the maps we have today i Think.. mor maps!

damn are u gary gygax in disguise?:)

I worked in some numbers



The left table are the chances to get each dice result depending on the XP level. As you can see, in level 1 all the results have 30/180=1/6, like in a normal dice. As levels go up the three lower results get decremented odds in favour of the three upper results.

The right table are the XP needed for each level. Each level needs 1.2 times the XP needed for the last level. No levels beyond 25.

I think that with Betiko's suggestion this idea gets improved a lot, because now each level makes a small difference, and several levels make a bigger difference.

Lord Arioch wrote:i get all warm and fuzzy in my old dungeons and dragons heart:)

i Think it would be a sweell idea BUT i see a real problem implemnting it on the maps we ahve today...
we mite have to build a whole new set of maps for it cause it is bad to pour in more add ons to the maps we have today i Think.. mor maps!

damn are u gary gygax in disguise?:)

I do intended to make the design for all games, new and old. This is a setting for all maps. Think about the Feudal War map that we have played a lot together. In that map, troops would get their first experience killing neutrals. Players could reserve one of the 10s in their kingdom until they have stacked an army big enough to raise the whole army to level 2 and get a small advantadge. That's just an example of how it would affect existing maps... for the better!

But this would also open new possibilites for new XML tags that could be used in new maps. The most obvious example I can think about is a tag to give XP to the armies stationed in a territory. That territory would be some sort of academy. Mapmakers could even design asymetrically balanced conquest maps with one side getting less armies but having the academy and the other side not having academy but getting a higher income.

And thanks for the nice words