Adjacent Attacks

[sully800]

I think speed AA would be a lot of fun, but probably too hard until it is actually implemented on the site. Speed freestyle AA would really reward some key last second attacks.

And yes, I agree with both of you that AA makes games quicker. And more awesome.

[denominator]

Have we tried a freestyle AA game yet?

[n00blet]

Not that I am aware of....Perhaps that should be next in line?

And of course, I concur

And yes, I agree with both of you that AA makes games quicker.

Especially this part:

And more awesome.

[OliverFA]

I think speed AA would be a lot of fun, but probably too hard until it is actually implemented on the site. Speed freestyle AA would really reward some key last second attacks.

I think that in this case I disagree with you. It is true that speed AA would reward some key last second attacks, but that would be nothing compared to what speed UA rewards.

With AA, the storming effect of a well placed attack gets minimized, simply because the player cannot storm the board due to limited movement. Yes. You would still be able to break a key continent bonus, or make the last attack to a weak in order in order to get his spoils. But nothing compared to what can be done now.

In fact, AA would make speed games a lot more fair. In think that with AA I would prefer speed games over sequential.

[sully800]

I think speed AA would be a lot of fun, but probably too hard until it is actually implemented on the site. Speed freestyle AA would really reward some key last second attacks.

I think that in this case I disagree with you. It is true that speed AA would reward some key last second attacks, but that would be nothing compared to what speed UA rewards.

With AA, the storming effect of a well placed attack gets minimized, simply because the player cannot storm the board due to limited movement. Yes. You would still be able to break a key continent bonus, or make the last attack to a weak in order in order to get his spoils. But nothing compared to what can be done now.

In fact, AA would make speed games a lot more fair. In think that with AA I would prefer speed games over sequential.

Yes, very true. My comment was referring to Speed freestyle AA versus regular AA where you can already see where someone is going to attack or has attacked. In a speed freestyle game we would be able to use some of the last second strategies that are currently used in freestyle which would be a fun addition. But as you said, it won't be a full rampage like you can currently do in freestyle. You would be rewarded for getting a pivotal territory and expanding your borders for the next turn, but it is not enough to win the game on one turn most likely.

We can try it out, but I worry that it may be too confusing without the limitations set by the game engine itself. No matter though, I'm always willing to try.

[OliverFA]

Sorry, I confused speed games and freestyle games. I was refering to freestyle of course

And yes, would be nice to try a freestyle. I am up to it

[denominator]

I think 6 is generally the number we end up playing with here, so I made a 6 player game:

Game 4945827
Classic Art
Freestyle
No Spoils
Adjacent
No Fog
pw: the usual, or PM me for it

[n00blet]

I'm in, of course. 2 more...

[wolfpack0530]

I was talking about this with a friend and he brought up and interesting scenario. I am not sure if it has been covered in this thread because i didnt read all 30 pages but here it goes.

Lets assume on the classic map that I own S. America and my opponent owns Africa.
Africa on his turn breaks my bonus and takes Brazil.
On my turn, I can only take Brazil back, but cant go on and break his bonus in Africa, even if it has a 1.

I can see a problem with this as he will break me every turn and i could never break him back, only recoup my losses. I will end up losing because he is getting an extra 3 armies every turn.

Either this scenario will be an acceptible part of the strategy (ie you better attack first), or you should be able to extend one territory beyond adjacent. Possibly, you should be able to reconquer terts that you controlled the turn before and extend one territory beyond that.

If this has already been covered in the thread, i apologize

[OliverFA]

I was talking about this with a friend and he brought up and interesting scenario. I am not sure if it has been covered in this thread because i didnt read all 30 pages but here it goes.

Lets assume on the classic map that I own S. America and my opponent owns Africa.
Africa on his turn breaks my bonus and takes Brazil.
On my turn, I can only take Brazil back, but cant go on and break his bonus in Africa, even if it has a 1.

I can see a problem with this as he will break me every turn and i could never break him back, only recoup my losses. I will end up losing because he is getting an extra 3 armies every turn.

Either this scenario will be an acceptible part of the strategy (ie you better attack first), or you should be able to extend one territory beyond adjacent. Possibly, you should be able to reconquer terts that you controlled the turn before and extend one territory beyond that.

If this has already been covered in the thread, i apologize

I would say this is exactly how it is intended to work and IMHO provides much more strategy than what we have now.

Let's call "Africa" player the player A and "America" player the player B

Think about UA. After conquering Brazil, player A would go on and easily conquer the rest of South America in just one turn. Let's say that player B has North and South America. By losing in Brazil he has lost South America bonus and also North America bonus. With AA he could still build a second line defense in Central America. If player A continues and conquers Venezuela, now it will be the defending army in Central America, player's B army, the one with the attacker's advantage.

Even more, maybe player B prefers to have defending troops in Venezuela instead of Brazil. Why? Because if Player A gets Brazil, then player B will be able to counterattack from Venezuela with the attackers's advantage. Player B will be sacrifying 2 reinforcements during one turn in exchange for a much more effective counterattack.

If player B had less armies, he would choose to defend from Venezuela. If he had the same or more armies, he would choose to defend from Brazil from where he would also be able to attack Africa.

IMHO that's a lot more strategy and tactics than plain UA. No more "acumulate armies in Australia then storm the map" tactics.

[sully800]

It's true that the person to attack first will be at an advantage, AA rewards aggressiveness. For that very reason, all other players depend on each other much more to maintain balance (because when balance tips in one direction it's very hard to regain control).

So the Africa guy attacks Brazil each round and gets 3 more men than the South America guy. This is no end to the South America guy, because there are probably 3 or 4 other players existing on the map. If Africa keeps focusing on Brazil then someone may take Europe. If South America can't be held then a player bidding for North America will have a much easier time. Once these two locations establish themselves, Africa finds many of his borders in contest and must defend his own territory, thus weakening his grip on Brazil and probably giving up on the constant attacks.

You cannot defend against 5 players at once, so repeatedly attacking a single person as you suggest is probably not a huge threat. Maintaining balance and being clear with your actions becomes a much bigger part of the game.

[OliverFA]

As you see, two people have come with two different strategies. My proposal is to defend from Venezuela instead of defend from Brazil, and Sully's proposal is to count on other players to distract the player from Africa.

I think that AA opens many more strategies. Specially, if combined with adjacent or chained reinforcements, a player can find that the troops he commited to an attack in one front are useless in another front. But even with unlimited reinforcements, there are a lot more choices than now.

Also, I think that AA brings the possibility of true encirclement tactics. An army attacking North America or Asia can be encircled by closing the border they breached without fearing that they will storm all those 1s.

[maasman]

I would love this, I play it all the time at home, though sadly, it almost always leads to stalemates and massive buildups, as long as no one screws up and they know what they're doing

[sully800]

I would love this, I play it all the time at home, though sadly, it almost always leads to stalemates and massive buildups, as long as no one screws up and they know what they're doing

I thought that might happen as well, but it has not happened in any of the test games so far. In fact they have ended faster then normal because the balance is so tenuous. Feel free to join our waiting game and give it a try on here!

[wolfpack0530]

thanks for the responses to my scenario. It has cleared up a lot and i totally support AA by the way

[n00blet]

Fresh faces are the lifeblood of this thread

Makes me smile every time...

[denominator]

The one thing that I really don't support AA for is 1v1 games. No matter what, AA will always favour the player that attacks first, which in a 1v1 game means the person that gets first turn. There is absolutely no way to come back from a bad first turn or unfair drop with AA.

Here's the game again for you newcomers:

Game 4945827
Classic Art
Freestyle
No Spoils
Adjacent
No Fog
pw: the usual, or PM me for it

[n00blet]

The one thing that I really don't support AA for is 1v1 games. No matter what, AA will always favour the player that attacks first, which in a 1v1 game means the person that gets first turn. There is absolutely no way to come back from a bad first turn or unfair drop with AA.

Here's the game again for you newcomers:

Game 4945827
Classic Art
Freestyle
No Spoils
Adjacent
No Fog
pw: the usual, or PM me for it

If it's on a really small map, I would agree. But then again, I just dislike Doodle Earthy maps in general.

If someone got a bad drop in World 2.1, they would have a longer time to get their forces together because the player's extra bonus wouldn't be as readily available for use. Rather than having all of one's continents run out within the 2nd turn, one would have a chance to create some buffer territories while they go about finding a bonus.

[denominator]

Two more spots in that game. If it drops I'll recreate it with 4 players.

[ubersky]

FYI: I posted this suggestion in Issue 10 of the CC Newsletter

[n00blet]

FYI: I posted this suggestion in Issue 10 of the CC Newsletter

Heeeyyyyyy. That's publicity right there!

My goodness, I think I might faint from all the stress now that my name's been in the newsletter. I'm pretty much a CC celebrity right now, right?

[OliverFA]

You might be a celebrity, but you cannot retire until this option is a reality

[a.sub]

or when a ssex tape is released about you
then you have to shave your head for re-initiation

[n00blet]

or when a ssex tape is released about you
then you have to shave your head for re-initiation

Oh, I already have a few of those...

[a.sub]

or when a ssex tape is released about you
then you have to shave your head for re-initiation

Oh, I already have a few of those...

WHAT?
i was googling for 3 hours and found nothing!!!!