Conquer Club

Proposed change to Nuclear

Suggestions that have been archived.

Moderator: Community Team

Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby PenalCode on Sun Feb 13, 2011 11:51 am

Why not make it so that you are exempt from nuking your own territories. Bombing your own territories just doesn't make sense, it just serves to penalize you for no reason at all.
Sergeant 1st Class PenalCode
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:46 pm

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby owenshooter on Sun Feb 13, 2011 12:18 pm

PenalCode wrote:Why not make it so that you are exempt from nuking your own territories. Bombing your own territories just doesn't make sense, it just serves to penalize you for no reason at all.

why don't you put this in the suggestions forum? making suggestions in the GD just doesn't make sense...-the black jesus
Image
Thorthoth,"Cloaking one's C&A fetish with moral authority and righteous indignation
makes it ever so much more erotically thrilling"
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class owenshooter
 
Posts: 13265
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 6:01 pm
Location: Deep in the Heart of Tx

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby rdsrds2120 on Sun Feb 13, 2011 12:23 pm

This goes to suggestions now.

-rd
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class rdsrds2120
 
Posts: 6274
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:42 am

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby PLAYER57832 on Sun Feb 13, 2011 12:33 pm

PenalCode wrote:Why not make it so that you are exempt from nuking your own territories. Bombing your own territories just doesn't make sense, it just serves to penalize you for no reason at all.

Actually, it does make sense. It adds to the impact.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby gradybridges on Sun Feb 13, 2011 1:36 pm

plus ift gives a safe spot to one of your territories. If you are down to one/2 territories on a small map with a couple players you can build up many rounds while the others attack eachother.
User avatar
Lieutenant gradybridges
 
Posts: 840
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 1:02 pm

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby Jatekos on Sun Feb 13, 2011 2:21 pm

I was actually thinking about a change in the nuclear spoils as well. I think nuclear is a great option for 1 vs 1 games, but not for multiplayer games. In the latter case, nuclear spoils can make games stalemates, because everyone keeps stacking on their cards in order to avoid being nuked.
I would like to keep the current nuclear spoils and suggest to create a new spoils type that suits better for multiplayer games.
Major Jatekos
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 6:47 pm

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby SirSebstar on Sun Feb 13, 2011 3:56 pm

nukes, if you allow terroists to have them, dont be surprised to see them turn them on your own..
also, i think nukes should have a more random deck, so you can actually grab the same card another has
Image
User avatar
Major SirSebstar
 
Posts: 6969
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:51 am
Location: SirSebstar is BACK. Highscore: Colonel Score: 2919 21/03/2011

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby alster on Sun Feb 13, 2011 4:12 pm

gradybridges wrote:plus ift gives a safe spot to one of your territories. If you are down to one/2 territories on a small map with a couple players you can build up many rounds while the others attack eachother.


Actually it doesn't. Two players can, at the same time, have the same region named in a spoil.
Gengoldy wrote:Of all the games I've played, and there have been some poor sports and cursing players out there, you are by far the lowest and with the least class.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class alster
 
Posts: 3083
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Sweden...

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby TheForgivenOne on Sun Feb 13, 2011 4:29 pm

alstergren wrote:
gradybridges wrote:plus ift gives a safe spot to one of your territories. If you are down to one/2 territories on a small map with a couple players you can build up many rounds while the others attack eachother.


Actually it doesn't. Two players can, at the same time, have the same region named in a spoil.


Tends to only happen on small maps with a lot of players. I think it only happens once all the territories cards have been exhausted from the "deck"
Image
Game 1675072
2018-08-09 16:02:06 - Mageplunka69: its jamaica map and TFO that keep me on this site
User avatar
Major TheForgivenOne
 
Posts: 5997
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 8:27 pm
Location: Lost somewhere in the snow. HELP ME

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby Jatekos on Sun Feb 13, 2011 4:59 pm

TheForgivenOne wrote:
alstergren wrote:
gradybridges wrote:plus ift gives a safe spot to one of your territories. If you are down to one/2 territories on a small map with a couple players you can build up many rounds while the others attack eachother.


Actually it doesn't. Two players can, at the same time, have the same region named in a spoil.


Tends to only happen on small maps with a lot of players. I think it only happens once all the territories cards have been exhausted from the "deck"

TFO is right. Normally you are safe if you build on the regions you own as a spoil. That's why stalemates occur in multiplayer nuclear games.
Major Jatekos
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 6:47 pm

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby greenoaks on Sun Feb 13, 2011 8:30 pm

Jatekos wrote:TFO is right. Normally you are safe if you build on the regions you own as a spoil. That's why stalemates occur in multiplayer nuclear games.

i have close to 1500 unique kills with nukes and have NEVER experienced a stalemate game because of them
User avatar
Sergeant greenoaks
 
Posts: 9977
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:47 am

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby Mr_Adams on Sun Feb 13, 2011 9:11 pm

This is amongst the worst ideas ever. I love the nukes, you just have to know how to play it.
Image
User avatar
Captain Mr_Adams
 
Posts: 1987
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:33 pm

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby Mr_Adams on Sun Feb 13, 2011 9:12 pm

If anything, MAYBE an option to combine it with other card options.
Image
User avatar
Captain Mr_Adams
 
Posts: 1987
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:33 pm

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby Jatekos on Mon Feb 14, 2011 5:07 pm

greenoaks wrote:
Jatekos wrote:TFO is right. Normally you are safe if you build on the regions you own as a spoil. That's why stalemates occur in multiplayer nuclear games.

i have close to 1500 unique kills with nukes and have NEVER experienced a stalemate game because of them

No wonder you have not come accross one if you have only played so few games.

Here is one from my extensive nuclear history: Game 6529815
This game made me realize that there are many players out there who know the nuclear strategy. :) Notice that Blue, Cyan and myself (Red) were all building up on selected regions.

Here is another one, which would have turned into a building game if there wasn't a player (Yellow) who mixed everything up, because he was not aware of the building-on-your-spoils strategy. Red, Blue and Pink (me) were stacking on cards. Game 7929508
Major Jatekos
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 6:47 pm

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby Jatekos on Mon Feb 14, 2011 5:21 pm

PenalCode wrote:Why not make it so that you are exempt from nuking your own territories. Bombing your own territories just doesn't make sense, it just serves to penalize you for no reason at all.

SirSebstar wrote:also, i think nukes should have a more random deck, so you can actually grab the same card another has

My suggestion for a new game type in line with the above:
- Make spoils truly random (you could actually grab the same card another has regardless of no. of players and no. of territories on the map).
- Instead of nuking your own territories, get +3 troops deployed on the regions that match the spoils you have cashed (if you own those regions).
- The regions other players own could still be nuked by you.

This would create a more attack-based game without possible stalemates and without the possibility of nuking yourself. On the contrary, it would reward the player who cashes spoils he/she ownes as territories, too.
Major Jatekos
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 6:47 pm

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby greenoaks on Tue Feb 15, 2011 12:02 am

Jatekos wrote:
greenoaks wrote:
Jatekos wrote:TFO is right. Normally you are safe if you build on the regions you own as a spoil. That's why stalemates occur in multiplayer nuclear games.

i have close to 1500 unique kills with nukes and have NEVER experienced a stalemate game because of them

No wonder you have not come accross one if you have only played so few games.

Here is one from my extensive nuclear history: Game 6529815
This game made me realize that there are many players out there who know the nuclear strategy. :) Notice that Blue, Cyan and myself (Red) were all building up on selected regions.

Here is another one, which would have turned into a building game if there wasn't a player (Yellow) who mixed everything up, because he was not aware of the building-on-your-spoils strategy. Red, Blue and Pink (me) were stacking on cards. Game 7929508

i can see how this is a problem if it has happened twice in your games and never in my 1,400+ nuclear games

management better get onto this immediately
User avatar
Sergeant greenoaks
 
Posts: 9977
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:47 am

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby Jatekos on Tue Feb 15, 2011 3:21 pm

greenoaks wrote:i can see how this is a problem if it has happened twice in your games and never in my 1,400+ nuclear games

management better get onto this immediately

Probably Circus Maximus is not the best map for nuclear multiplayer games, as there are no bonuses to go for.

Anyway, if 2 or more players could have the same spoils at the same time then there would be more incentive to attack.
Major Jatekos
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 6:47 pm

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby Queen_Herpes on Fri Mar 04, 2011 3:06 pm

I think this can be merged with the other (failed) attempts to get Nuclear to be modified. (One sugg was written by me, I certainly support changing it - but I don't think the site is going to go in reverse now that there is an award for nuclear games won.)
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=102006

This link is the best way to make new players feel welcome...

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=102006
User avatar
Lieutenant Queen_Herpes
 
Posts: 1337
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 9:50 pm
Location: Right Here. Look into my eyes.

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby PLAYER57832 on Sat Mar 05, 2011 8:14 am

PenalCode wrote:Why not make it so that you are exempt from nuking your own territories. Bombing your own territories just doesn't make sense, it just serves to penalize you for no reason at all.

I like the way it is now. It offers something different. Nuking just the opponents territory would make it not that much different than the other spoils options (just reversed). This, the chance that you might penalize yourself as well as the opponent is an interesting twist.
Corporal PLAYER57832
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:17 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Proposed change to Nuclear

Postby Jatekos on Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:39 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:Nuking just the opponents territory would make it not that much different than the other spoils options (just reversed). This, the chance that you might penalize yourself as well as the opponent is an interesting twist.

Maybe we could develop it to be different enough from other spoils, so that a new game option can be created, while keeping the current nuclear spoils.
Major Jatekos
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 6:47 pm


Return to Archived Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users