Suggestion - Battle Readiness Option

Humanist · Post by **Humanist** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 2:16 pm

Suggestion Idea:

I suggest a new option be made available - Battle Readiness. In 'real-life' if a large army stands dormant for a length of time, that army would not as ready for battle as veterans who have recently been on campaign. Therefore there could be a penalty for large, dormant armies and perhaps a bonus for active armies.

Specifics:

If an army of 10 or more armies did not attack in the previous round, it will lose 1 army. On the other hand, if an army did attack the previous round it will gain 1 army.

Why it is needed:

More and more games are reduced to a stalemate where the players with continents just sit back, build up and wait for their opponents to destroy each other before taking advantage and stepping in. This would make for a more dynamic, aggressive and (hopefully) a shorter game.

brandoncfi · Post by **brandoncfi** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:01 pm

interesting

Humanist · Post by **Humanist** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:27 pm

brandoncfi wrote:interesting

With hindsight, it could be called the "Do or die" option.

And ALL armies would be subject to -1 if they stand still or +1 if they attack.

Soloman · Post by **Soloman** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:31 pm

Humanist wrote:
brandoncfi wrote:interesting
With hindsight, it could be called the "Do or die" option.

And ALL armies would be subject to -1 if they stand still or +1 if they attack.

there is a few maps that already do that isn't there?

Humanist · Post by **Humanist** » Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:37 pm

Soloman wrote:
Humanist wrote:
brandoncfi wrote:interesting
With hindsight, it could be called the "Do or die" option.

And ALL armies would be subject to -1 if they stand still or +1 if they attack.
there is a few maps that already do that isn't there?

There is? I know about the Dustbowl map where you lose 1 man a round in the middle. But I don't know of one where you gain/lose armies according to whether you attacked or not in the previous round.

Ditocoaf · Post by **Ditocoaf** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 1:32 am

This would be interesting, either way you implement it. I support this.

cicero · Post by **cicero** » Fri Mar 14, 2008 3:08 am

The game is already fairly delicately balanced and slightly in favour of the attacker (3 dice v 2 dice).
To further tip the advantage in favour of an attacker seems to risk tipping that balance too far ...

Also, ignoring that for a moment, in a build game (which is what you're describing I think) surely all players can happily take the hit of the -1 armies on certain territories and just keep building regardless ... and that sounds to me like it would actually slow such a game down?