Conquer Club

Posted: **Thu Apr 26, 2007 2:28 pm**

How about an option in new games to set a Maximum # of Armies on the board? For example, you could set it to 100, and when there are a hundred armies on the board, you can't get any more until some of them get wiped out. If you had armies coming to you but the limit was already reached, your new armies keep getting carried over until you can legally deploy them on one of your turns when the total army population on the board dips below the threshold.

I was inspired by another post on this forum, and a game I played a few times years ago....

There's a board-game where you control one of the various late-bronze-age or early-iron-age powers of the Mediterranean -- IIRC the Greeks, Romans, Carthageneans, Macedonians, Etruscans, Egyptians, etc.... (BTW, you would also get a General or "Caeser", as it's called in the game, which could accompany your troops for a bonus on rolls, but if you lost your "Caeser", you lost the game.) You could buy troops, chariots and triremes from the market.

As more and more troops were fielded, the supply of troops in the box would dwindle, and the price for new troops would escalate, until you couldn't buy any. The only way for the "market" to get "new" troops was to remove troops from the board back into the box -- in other words, loosing them in battle.

I've seen Risk games with ungodly numbers of troops on the board, and it could be argued that such high numbers could not possibly be manned or supported.

Posted: **Thu Apr 26, 2007 3:04 pm**

CreepyUncleAndy wrote:How about an option in new games to set a Maximum # of Armies on the board? For example, you could set it to 100, and when there are a hundred armies on the board, you can't get any more until some of them get wiped out. If you had armies coming to you but the limit was already reached, your new armies keep getting carried over until you can legally deploy them on one of your turns when the total army population on the board dips below the threshold.

I was inspired by another post on this forum, and a game I played a few times years ago....

There's a board-game where you control one of the various late-bronze-age or early-iron-age powers of the Mediterranean -- IIRC the Greeks, Romans, Carthageneans, Macedonians, Etruscans, Egyptians, etc.... (BTW, you would also get a General or "Caeser", as it's called in the game, which could accompany your troops for a bonus on rolls, but if you lost your "Caeser", you lost the game.) You could buy troops, chariots and triremes from the market.

As more and more troops were fielded, the supply of troops in the box would dwindle, and the price for new troops would escalate, until you couldn't buy any. The only way for the "market" to get "new" troops was to remove troops from the board back into the box -- in other words, loosing them in battle.

I've seen Risk games with ungodly numbers of troops on the board, and it could be argued that such high numbers could not possibly be manned or supported.

If there was a poll for this, I'd chose the "gfy" option.
Take for example, you have a Esc. Games, and you have 100 armies, and the next cash is worth 100, you have a set, and you cash it, you cant deploy any armies?
What if then take your opponent down to 10 men, then he cashes for 105, he now tries to take you out, and does successfully.. you now feel like you shouldn't have made this suggestion, and wasted your time

Just my opinion, not the right one, but still, I believe that most people will agree a limit on armies would be a bad idea, because someone could cash, and even up the game more easily!

Thanks,
John

Posted: **Thu Apr 26, 2007 9:35 pm**

john1099 wrote:Take for example, you have a Esc. Games, and you have 100 armies, and the next cash is worth 100, you have a set, and you cash it, you cant deploy any armies?

What if then take your opponent down to 10 men, then he cashes for 105, he now tries to take you out, and does successfully..

That's just it -- you have to be careful not to let your opponent turn the tables thusly; I'm just proposing we add a new axis to the yaw-pitch-roll of the proverbial turning table.

However, I don't thing you're seeing this the way that I intended....

Say, in the example above, you take your opponent down to 10 men, then he cashes in for 105. For the sake of argument, the Army Limit is set to 100. Your opponent can only place 90 of those 105 men because that takes him to the Army Limit. But wait: you have 50 men of your own, which means he can only place 40 of his, because your 50 plus his 10 and his 40 new armies equals 100.

The remaining 65 armies go into his (your opponent's) Conscription Cue. At the beginning of his next turn, he gets to deploy armies from his Conscription Cue (plus normal territorial and card deployments) up to 100 minus the number of armies still alive on the board at the start of his next turn.

In the above example, your forces are not outnumbered 115:50; they are evenly matched 50:50, and if anybody looses some armies before your next turn, you'll be able to tip the balance in your favor by deploying armies from your regular deployment and Conscription Cue up to that maximum number of one hundred armies on the board.

Conceivably, by the start of your next turn, your opponent may have wasted half of his armies taking out half of yours, reducing your respective forces to 25 versus 25, which means that you might be able to deploy 50 armies, bringing the balance of power to 25:75 in your favor.

Remember, these example assume an arbitrary limit of 100, but games enabling this feature may have any number selected as the Army Limit (or "Army Cap" if you prefer).

Posted: **Thu Apr 26, 2007 9:42 pm**

oh, i thought you meant just for yourself, not for everyone on the board!
this may work if its a 2,000 army limit or something more, but not 100, because most maps for a 6 player game deploy more than 100.

Also, what happens when you kill off your opponents armies, but he still has some saved over from the last rounds?

Does that mean he is dead, or does he stay active until you kill off all of his armies?
Gets crazy after a while, because not only would you have to have a counter to show how many armies he has left over, but also take tabs on how many he still has active in the game.

Just my 2 cents, not always right, but I'm pretty sure this idea needs a little work

Posted: **Thu Apr 26, 2007 9:48 pm**

john1099 wrote:oh, i thought you meant just for yourself, not for everyone on the board!
this may work if its a 2,000 army limit or something more, but not 100, because most maps for a 6 player game deploy more than 100.

Agreed -- 100 was just an arbitrary number for sake of (simple) example. I'm thinking most people will play with a limit of a couple thousand....

john1099 wrote:Also, what happens when you kill off your opponents armies, but he still has some saved over from the last rounds?

Does that mean he is dead, or does he stay active until you kill off all of his armies?

No; once an opponent is eliminated, he is dead; his Conscription Cue is reduced to zero, and all the armies that were in it are lost.

john1099 wrote:Gets crazy after a while, because not only would you have to have a counter to show how many armies he has left over, but also take tabs on how many he still has active in the game.

Just my 2 cents, not always right, but I'm pretty sure this idea needs a little work

Hmmm....I guess maybe there could be a Conscription Counter next to each person's name -- or maybe playing without any idea (unless you meticulously check the log) of how many armies someones' got in their cue would be fun.

And, yes, of course; all of my ideas need a little work. :lol:

BTW, I added a pole! Go vote your conscience.... $\:D/$

Posted: **Thu Apr 26, 2007 10:04 pm**

CreepyUncleAndy wrote:
john1099 wrote:
BTW, I added a pole! Go vote your conscience.... $\:D/$

I'm voting option # 4, but option # 5 is so tempting!

No; once an opponent is eliminated, he is dead; his Conscription Cue is reduced to zero, and all the armies that were in it are lost.

Also, this may make people a little angry, they have just cashed for a monsterous amount of armies, and they cant deploy, I just cashed and bammo! kill all their armies, they may have had X amount in the Conscription Cue but, hey I win anyways

I could see people using this at the rate of somewhere around 10k, so that games dont go as long or something like that, but for the normal game, I think i'd stick to the way it is.

Although, I'll definitely be watching this closely, because who knows, someone might think of something we haven't, suggest it, and I may come to enjoy it!
Thanks, and hope you have many more ideas in the future!
John

Posted: **Thu Apr 26, 2007 10:20 pm**

I am opposed to the TOTAL army cap (ie. you can only have 100 armies on the board).

However i think it would be a good idea to have a limit cap on individual countries. For instance. you wouldn't be allowed to place over 50 armies on a single country. I think that this would increase strategy required far more than just limiting TOTAL number of armies

thoughts anyone? :?:

Posted: **Thu Apr 26, 2007 10:23 pm**

bsbllrules wrote::x I am opposed to the TOTAL army cap (ie. you can only have 100 armies on the board).
However i think it would be a good idea to have a limit cap on individual countries. For instance. you wouldn't be allowed to place over 50 armies on a single country. I think that this would increase strategy required far more than just limiting TOTAL number of armies

thoughts anyone?

if you're sticking 50+ armies on a country you're more than likely going for the kill.
Therefore, what does it matter if you can put 50+ armies on 1 country or not, most people don't get up that wouldnhigh, therefore you 't need to implement this rule!
thanks,
John

Posted: **Thu Apr 26, 2007 10:30 pm**

CreepyUncleAndy wrote:That's just it -- you have to be careful not to let your opponent turn the tables thusly; I'm just proposing we add a new axis to the yaw-pitch-roll of the proverbial turning table.

thats a great sentence...

It actually is a great option....changes the game substantially...it increases complexity of strategy quite a bit....ive played on sites with this option, and it does get tricky

Posted: **Mon Apr 30, 2007 6:09 pm**

Wouldn't be a bad idea if you had the option when creating the game, with the limit as well as having the limit. Then if you liked it you could play, and if not, then don't.

Posted: **Mon Apr 30, 2007 6:19 pm**

BAD IDEA.

The game could reach the max with a player having 50% of the total, and everyone else is screwed.

Posted: **Mon Apr 30, 2007 6:32 pm**

freezie wrote:BAD IDEA.

The game could reach the max with a player having 50% of the total, and everyone else is screwed.

Conquer Club

Population Limits

Population Limits

Re: Population Limits

Re: Population Limits

Re: Population Limits