Page 1 of 2
4 Vs. 4 Option

Posted:
Wed May 10, 2006 2:17 am
by eye84free
instead of just a trip. game how about the option of 4 on 4 team play only.

Posted:
Wed May 10, 2006 7:17 am
by moz976
I don't know if I like this idea. With 8 people on the board it would be way to crowded and would probably take a lot to program.

Posted:
Wed May 10, 2006 7:24 am
by Derwiddle
Ditto that, it could get a bit hectic. Not to mention there have never been 8 players in a real riskboard anyway. It's always been 6.

Posted:
Wed May 10, 2006 7:32 am
by Black Jack
It's always been 6.
Uuuhhhh, I suggest some research
Risk variants, including online versions, with more than 6 players... are common as Hades.
More than 6 players are permitted in RiskII... the authorized sequel.
Lack stated, in another thread, that upping the number of players... is no big deal.
The problem right now, is that no suitable maps exist at CC... at this time.
[/quote]

Posted:
Wed May 10, 2006 7:35 am
by Derwiddle
Really? I was just thinking of the Classic risk board.


Posted:
Wed May 10, 2006 7:52 am
by wacicha
the main problem at this time would be 1 team playing before the other teamthe first team would have the definite advantage

Posted:
Wed May 10, 2006 2:00 pm
by UTGreen
Yeah, things would swing so wildly between teams turns that i don't think it would be terribly fun or strategic... then again I'm not that big of team games in any capacity. Maybe if you rotated turns so teams didn't go all at once? Still, people complain about waiting around on a 6 person game, why make the move into 8 without some compelling reason.

Posted:
Wed May 10, 2006 2:01 pm
by onbekende
other idea, when one looses, no big deal

Posted:
Wed May 10, 2006 2:11 pm
by Haydena
This is why people have been making larger maps.

Posted:
Wed May 10, 2006 2:57 pm
by eye84free
if it was 8....space it...2 go on a team at a time. meaning 2 on one team plays the 2 on the othe so on and so fourth...

Posted:
Wed May 10, 2006 3:03 pm
by eye84free
just one of those crazy ideas...

Posted:
Wed May 10, 2006 5:24 pm
by kingwaffles
I think it could definetly work and be a lot of fun, it would just require one of the larger maps such as London Postcode, Freakshow's gimongous map, or THE world map. It wouldn't work out any of the maps we have now.

Posted:
Wed May 10, 2006 5:32 pm
by eye84free
UR RIGHT...THE BIGGER THE BETTER.

Posted:
Thu May 11, 2006 4:22 pm
by corner G
I think it's a cool idea. even if some people dont like it, others mite

Posted:
Fri May 12, 2006 3:58 am
by Blitzkreig
I get frustrated enough playing with one deadbeat let alone having to deal with three.

Posted:
Fri May 12, 2006 8:58 pm
by agarvin
Derwiddle wrote:Ditto that, it could get a bit hectic. Not to mention there have never been 8 players in a real riskboard anyway. It's always been 6.
The classic board just has 6 continents. But there are at least a couple maps here that have 8 continents--Crossword & Montreal I can think of offhand. It could be interesting, at least if they stagger the turns. 4 teammates going in a row could make for a devestating attack.

Posted:
Fri May 12, 2006 9:55 pm
by eye84free
ur right...it would...it would be a good place to try alternating the teams in there positions...
nice

Posted:
Sat May 13, 2006 6:58 pm
by jamie_hayes
yes it could possibly work but we would need a bigger more open map 4 this to really work , the only problem i can see is that it would get EXTREAMLY annoying if someone went into to a "4 on 4" game just to waste time


Posted:
Sun May 14, 2006 9:48 am
by hunny
Yeah we could get some one to make a special 4 on 4 map 4 this couldent we?? that would make it exciting and unpredictible


Posted:
Sun May 14, 2006 10:15 am
by Red Army
Sure, I have no problem with this option... I just won't join any game with more than 6 people, but if it pleases others, good for them.

Posted:
Thu Feb 08, 2007 12:20 pm
by spinwizard
why was this rejected?

Posted:
Thu Feb 08, 2007 4:37 pm
by maniacmath17
well this was made back when all the members of one team would go and then all the members of the other team would go instead of alternating turns between teams. So back then the 4 v 4 would have given a definite advantage to the first team but now I don't see a problem with the option.

Posted:
Thu Feb 08, 2007 5:12 pm
by spinwizard
that is y i bought it back up


Posted:
Fri Feb 09, 2007 4:07 pm
by eye84free
yes and now we have a few maps that will fit the bill for a 4 vs 4 battle....

Posted:
Fri Feb 09, 2007 4:50 pm
by spinwizard
spinwizard wrote:that is y i bought it back up
