Suggestions that have been archived.
Moderator: Community Team
Lord_Bremen
Posts: 147 Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 12:22 amGender: MaleLocation: Chicago
Post
by Lord_Bremen Tue Feb 05, 2013 1:39 am
Description:
When attacking an allied territory that has only one army, you automatically win.
How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:
This will make it easier to coordinate on team games: if you want to grab one of your allies' territories you can just deploy one guy and be assured you'll take it without losses.
Kaskavel
Posts: 395 Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 8:08 pm
Post
by Kaskavel Tue Feb 05, 2013 10:34 pm
That is a playable version
NoSurvivors
Posts: 1479 Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 10:25 am
Post
by NoSurvivors Tue Feb 05, 2013 10:47 pm
At first I thought you meant auto win the game
. But it could impede play and make unfair advantages possibly.. IDK about this..
Lord_Bremen
Posts: 147 Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 12:22 amGender: MaleLocation: Chicago
Post
by Lord_Bremen Wed Feb 06, 2013 7:39 pm
NoSurvivors wrote: At first I thought you meant auto win the game
. But it could impede play and make unfair advantages possibly.. IDK about this..
How? It makes no sense to lose armies taking an allied territory so you can grab a bonus.
greenoaks
Posts: 9977 Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:47 am
Post
by greenoaks Wed Feb 06, 2013 9:26 pm
Lord_Bremen wrote: NoSurvivors wrote: At first I thought you meant auto win the game
. But it could impede play and make unfair advantages possibly.. IDK about this..
How? It makes no sense to lose armies taking an allied territory so you can grab a bonus.
you are right, it makes no sense. no cards should be awarded for acquiring a region this way.
agentcom
Posts: 3994 Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 8:50 pm
Post
by agentcom Thu Feb 07, 2013 4:07 am
Been suggested before, but it's late, and I'll have to go find the other thread later.
skychaser
Posts: 138 Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 11:22 pm
Post
by skychaser Fri Feb 08, 2013 8:36 pm
I agree to that. If one want's you to take his territory it's only basic that he should let you win.
qwertylpc
Posts: 759 Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 4:12 pmLocation: In front of a computer somewhere out there in the universe
Contact:
Post
by qwertylpc Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:38 pm
sounds good to me, but would you recieve a spoil for it?
nicestash
Posts: 472 Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 8:50 pm
Post
by nicestash Tue Feb 12, 2013 9:36 pm
I don't like this idea; if Germany had tried to take North Africa from Italy in WWII it would
NOT have gone well. No soldier is just going to stand by and let you kill him
patrickaa317
Posts: 2269 Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2009 5:10 pmGender: Male
Post
by patrickaa317 Sun Feb 17, 2013 11:55 pm
I don't like this. makes the late kills in escalating super easy as you'd just need one attacker per ally territory; not enough of a chance.
taking a break from cc, will be back sometime in the future.
betiko
Posts: 10941 Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:05 pmGender: MaleLocation: location, location
Post
by betiko Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:08 am
patrickaa317 wrote: I don't like this. makes the late kills in escalating super easy as you'd just need one attacker per ally territory; not enough of a chance.
good point i didn't think about it at first.
chapcrap
Posts: 9686 Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 12:46 amGender: MaleLocation: Kansas City
Post
by chapcrap Tue Feb 26, 2013 1:50 pm
This will take extensive coding with minimal benefit in gameplay.REJECTED
. But it could impede play and make unfair advantages possibly.. IDK about this..
