a way to balence 2 player games

[dominationnation]

subject
balencing 2 player games without neutrals
---------

body

I know that there has been a lot of complaining about the neutrals so I have an other susgestion. Make it so that everyone gets 3 armies for thier first few turns. what do you think

I think that this is a 3 as I love the 2 player games even thouhg I havnt had a chance to play it yet but I think that this might make it better

[dominationnation]

bump-anything?

[AK_iceman]

I like the neutral armies.

[freezie]

I like the neutral armies.

So do I.


Neutrals offer a different style of play than regular games. Strategy isn't the same, if they lose, then they need to practice. If they don't like it, then they should go play 3 players.

[billval3]

I like the neutrals, too. It adds a new twist on the strategy of the game. You can win a game without ever taking certain areas, but leaving them as a buffer.

[gimil]

i also like the nutreal. if u have 3 armires for your 1st turn. that still means round 2 the 1st player gets more armies and put palyer 2 at a disadvantage

[Herakilla]

lol using them as a buffer quickly rose to one of my faveorite thin gs to do. you lose NOTHING if your opponent attacks them, they may lose armies and you wont lose a territory or any troops. once i trapped a player in aussie with neutral on siam, india and china lol

[RobinJ]

I like the neutrals but I also agree that something needs to be done about continents because I lost in 3 rounds because the other guy held Scandanavia in the Europe map.

However, I think the idea of rerandomising the territories until no-one gets a continent would be better (saw that in some other thread)

[Wisse]

2 player games are now more a luck game, if you have good placements then you win 75%

[The1exile]

2 player games are now more a luck game, if you have good placements then you win 75%

I know. neutral keeps starting with entire continents and yet my opponents won't ally with me against him.