Conquer Club

The person going first in a sequential 2 player game has a major advantage. How about the first person not being able to attack, but can fortify instead?

this still leaves the 1st player an advantage because the 1nd player is bulked which stop the 2nd player taking anything out

Which happens anyway.

well i have played 2 player games a couple of times, but it is not any fun, there are just 2 things that matter in a 2 player game: country placement and dice. Since both are random 2 player games are not quite fun, for strategy is rarely involved.

Still, it would be an good option. also for freestyle, for in freestyle the player to join is mostly the "first" player.

it gives player 1 the advantage to have more armies, but player 2 to do the first attack. i think i quite like it

i dont agree with this option, just because you yourself can be the first player to play in sequencial so whats the big deal?

you can win even if your the second to play. i have done it alot.

futoomph wrote:The person going first in a sequential 2 player game has a major advantage. How about the first person not being able to attack, but can fortify instead?

Good idea. Now often the 1st player can already take a small continent, and then the 2nd player is already almost lost. When the 1st player can't attack this leaves the 2nd player with a more equal chance. He now can't take a small continent that easy as the 1st player already have forted or deployed to defend.
But I think this is only needed in Unlimited games. Adjacent or Chained already gives much less advantage to the 1st player.

I like this idea in theory... it causes more strategy to be used and could be an option that could be chosen at the begining of the game and people could choose to play it like that or not.

I was thinking about something like this when I had a brilliant drop but went second and was annihilated. However, I 've just switched to playing 2-player as a freestyle game - it requires a bit more skill