How does it make sense?

by **boogiesadda** on Sat Aug 05, 2006 8:26 am

It makes no sense to me! Why in a team game can you fortify your team mate yet only get a bonus if one is holding the territory if it is a team game you should get the bonus if the team is holding it!!!! Just doesn't make sense to me!!! Why not just start a six player game and make alliances it would be no different

by **D.IsleRealBrown** on Sat Aug 05, 2006 8:29 am

Seconded!

by **Ronaldinho** on Sat Aug 05, 2006 8:34 am

boogiesadda wrote:It makes no sense to me! Why in a team game can you fortify your team mate yet only get a bonus if one is holding the territory if it is a team game you should get the bonus if the team is holding it!!!! Just doesn't make sense to me!!! Why not just start a six player game and make alliances it would be no different

IDIOT! go play tic-tac-toe

by **gavin_sidhu** on Sat Aug 05, 2006 8:34 am

Who would get the bonus points then, you or your partner? Alot of problems arise if this happens.

by **Tr0y** on Sat Aug 05, 2006 8:47 am

Bonus # of Armies * ( Countries Owned in Continent / Total Countries in Continent )
Rounded Down.

( or up... if you want to promote teamwork... I dunno... )

by **DavSav** on Sat Aug 05, 2006 8:58 am

boogiesadda wrote:It makes no sense to me! Why in a team game can you fortify your team mate yet only get a bonus if one is holding the territory if it is a team game you should get the bonus if the team is holding it!!!! Just doesn't make sense to me!!! Why not just start a six player game and make alliances it would be no different

Would be too easy if that was the case. Would often come down to who got lycky when game start as well

by **boogiesadda** on Sat Aug 05, 2006 9:05 am

IDIOT! go play tic-tac-toe<<<<Wow aren't you sophisticated it was just a question so how does it make me an idiot.

by **2dimes** on Sat Aug 05, 2006 10:52 am

One difference is if you get taken out then your team mate wins or visa-versa you sort of still win the game and get points.

by **Marvaddin** on Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:12 pm

If the team can hold the continent, is very easy avoid the elimination of your partner, since you can protect him in a internal country, like Peru. This makes also easy exchange countries for cards, so your partner in Peru takes Argentina and you get it back, no problem... No, if you want the bonuses, you need have some risk involved. I would agree with some forced low rolls for your partner when you attack him.

by **gavin_sidhu** on Sun Aug 06, 2006 6:43 am

Its better the way it is because you have more decissions to make. The main decission would be whether you should use your reinforcements to take your partners countries in a continent or kill the oponent.

Tr0y wrote:Bonus # of Armies * ( Countries Owned in Continent / Total Countries in Continent )
Rounded Down.

( or up... if you want to promote teamwork... I dunno... )

What about that 3 country island in the montreal map, no reinforcements for either in that, and what about australia if one person owns 3 countries and another owns 1, ur still a man short. People will complain about this if it is implemented.

Talking about allies, in chain fortification, can you fortify to the front line of your enemy, eg if you own africa and your partner owns south america, can you fortify from north africa to venuezala?

by **Nikolai** on Sun Aug 06, 2006 3:53 pm

Other problem: how do you decide who gets the bonus? Do you give it to the person with the majority of the countries, or split it between the two/three, or what? It'd get too complicated. It's better this way, for reasons already mentioned.