Conquer Club

What sort of games would you like to see being made that aren't being made at the moment.

Add specific games you'd like to see to the list or just vote.

hmm i was an elite player for one game...lol i think escalating chained/adjacent will be interesting

I don't consider myself elite, but escalating/unlimited is the only choice.

Fireside Poet wrote:I don't consider myself elite, but escalating/unlimited is the only choice.

I personally hate unlimited (for escalating games - They make sense with flat rate / no cards). Especially for Elite players.
The Reason?
Unlimited forts allows a player to sort out any mistakes. With adjacent / chained - you have 1 fort to make, so you had better make it count. I feel that Elite players should be at a standard where they don't require to undo all the mistakes. (just my opinion)

But I'll make more of them, seeing as a lot of you like them.

Pedronicus wrote:

Fireside Poet wrote:I don't consider myself elite, but escalating/unlimited is the only choice.

I personally hate unlimited (for escalating games - They make sense with flat rate / no cards). Especially for Elite players.
The Reason?
Unlimited forts allows a player to sort out any mistakes. With adjacent / chained - you have 1 fort to make, so you had better make it count. I feel that Elite players should be of a standard where they don't require to undo all the mistakes. (just my opinion)

But I'll make more of them, seeing as a lot of you like them.

Standards for eliteness? *sigh* I'll NEVER be that!

Pedronicus wrote:

Fireside Poet wrote:I don't consider myself elite, but escalating/unlimited is the only choice.

I personally hate unlimited (for escalating games - They make sense with flat rate / no cards). Especially for Elite players.
The Reason?
Unlimited forts allows a player to sort out any mistakes. With adjacent / chained - you have 1 fort to make, so you had better make it count. I feel that Elite players should be at a standard where they don't require to undo all the mistakes. (just my opinion)

But I'll make more of them, seeing as a lot of you like them.

Mnnnnn.... never looked at it that way before...
Can I change my vote?

Ill play them, but I simply prefer unlimited forts with Esc, flat rate & no cards

I voted flat rate unlimited, it's the only one for me. Though unlimited doesn't really matter.

Just finishing my first "elite" game, was a hell of a game, looking forward to more.

I prefer Escalating Adjacent or Chained, for exactly the reason Pedro points out, it makes you think more about your tactics and what you need to do in the turn.

It also means if you balls it up just like I've done a couple of times you can't rectify it .

The Reason?
Unlimited forts allows a player to sort out any mistakes. With adjacent / chained - you have 1 fort to make, so you had better make it count. I feel that Elite players should be at a standard where they don't require to undo all the mistakes. (just my opinion)

With 1 fort you are limiting the amount information you need to process in your brain. I guess thinking thru every fort and possible deviations for the future 1-2 turns is not for everybody

And you mentioned the mistakes people do, and having ability to correct them. It is not about errors u need to correct, it is about the frigging dice u need to correct. Unless u are attacking 10vs1, u can never be sure (actually recently even my 10vs1 have failed...). And u do need to correct it.

And how would u get 10vs1 in first place in the chained? Oh, wait i know, sit out or deadbeat for 3 rounds.

But the problem with the Risk is, that statistically attackers win (attacking with 3vs1 or 3vs2), so if you are going to sit out/deadbeat, and dice behaves randomly, as it should, you will lose your games.

And now about escalating. Playing in 6 peoples game (unless it triples) at least 2 players will either go crazy attacking (3vs3, 1vs2, 2vs2) or dice will screw them over and they lose all theirs armies by round 3-4. And almost in all of them someone gets to eliminate that guy. And that elimination is a way too random: have u been placed originally next to those guys? Are you making turn when elimination is feasible? So someone (quite randomly) ends up with extra 2-3 cards, and that is a huge difference for the round 4-5-6.

In triples u at least have 50+% chance that these 2-3 cards will end up in your team, so it's not that bigger deal.

Playing no cards requires most thinking, and it tends to take much longer time span, and therefore they are less entertaining.

That's my opinion, and explanation for my vote.

I don't personally prefer Escalating (although I have won a lot of Escalating games where i was down to 4 or 5 territories) for that reason, as long as someone can hang in until sets are worth a lot, they get back into the game, whereas more stategy is needed to stay in a game with Flat Rate.

I like flat rate because there is no reason you hold out and hang on to a set for next round because the next set is only worth 4, if i have a mixed set, i get 10 regardless, also, the sets don't get out of hand as they can in escalating.

and as for no cards, i like no cards games, but it seems like a lot of the time someone who is almost out can hide and just accumulate 3 each turn and wait until they have 20 or 30+ armies and be back in the game (currently in round 35 of one such game where there is no clear 'leader')

AndrewB wrote:
And now about escalating. Playing in 6 peoples game (unless it triples) at least 2 players will either go crazy attacking (3vs3, 1vs2, 2vs2) or dice will screw them over and they lose all theirs armies by round 3-4.

I have yet to see anyone in an Elite game go 'Crazy' - most of these game (Especially esc. are really tight affairs)

proof - a game I'm currently in

as for fortifications, when playing the board game i prefer adjacent, forces you to really think out your next move, so someone cant take a plunge with 20 armies into some other people's bonus areas and then just bring them back and fortify.

but when playing on CC, I like unlimited simply because of the fact you start the game with 3 armies on every space, I really wish they had a game mode for people who want to place their armies before the start of the game, just have the placement be freestyle as it would take forever to wait for each person to place 1 to 3 armies per cycle.

Pedronicus wrote:What sort of games would you like to see being made that aren't being made at the moment.

Add specific games you'd like to see to the list or just vote.

well I think it all depends on the map thats being used .. so to vote I couldnt because my interests very from map to map ...

Loudawg wrote:well I think it all depends on the map thats being used .. so to vote I couldnt because my interests very from map to map ...

Well write down what map / numbers of players / forts / cards etc. you'd like to see me make - I'll make any requests that are added to this thread

Pedronicus wrote:Well write down what map / numbers of players / forts / cards etc. you'd like to see me make - I'll make any requests that are added to this thread

Circus Maiximus/ 6 players/ No cards/ adjacent forts/ Standard

Pedronicus wrote:
I have yet to see anyone in an Elite game go 'Crazy' - most of these game (Especially esc. are really tight affairs)

proof - a game I'm currently in

Common, honestly, how often do u get Elite opponents in your triples? 5%? at most...

AK_iceman wrote:

Pedronicus wrote:Well write down what map / numbers of players / forts / cards etc. you'd like to see me make - I'll make any requests that are added to this thread

Circus Maiximus/ 6 players/ No cards/ adjacent forts/ Standard

Are you familiar with the acronyms GFY & EASD?

AndrewB wrote:

Pedronicus wrote:
I have yet to see anyone in an Elite game go 'Crazy' - most of these game (Especially esc. are really tight affairs)

proof - a game I'm currently in

Common, honestly, how often do u get Elite opponents in your triples? 5%? at most...

You lost me - you weren't talking about triples in your earlier reply about people going crazy.

Also - I'd like to point out that Elite games aren't mine - they are for everyone with over 1600 points

Pedronicus wrote:
You lost me - you weren't talking about triples in your earlier reply about people going crazy.

Also - I'd like to point out that Elite games aren't mine - they are for everyone with over 1600 points

LOL, now you lost me, what the hell is Elite games? I thought it's any game, where there is at least 1 player with 1600+ points...

Pedronicus wrote:

AK_iceman wrote:

Pedronicus wrote:Well write down what map / numbers of players / forts / cards etc. you'd like to see me make - I'll make any requests that are added to this thread

Circus Maiximus/ 6 players/ No cards/ adjacent forts/ Standard

Are you familiar with the acronyms GFY & EASD?

Google says that:
GFY = gross fish yield
EASD = European Association of Securities Dealers

But I am not sure what fish and Securities have something to do with Circus Maximus....

Pedronicus wrote:Well write down what map / numbers of players / forts / cards etc. you'd like to see me make - I'll make any requests that are added to this thread

In that case i'd like to see a Terminator/Sequential/Canada/flat rate/unlimited/4 players

Well the absolute best game I can think of doesn't exisit...

"Flat Escalating" (advance by 1 --> 4,5,6,7,8,9,...)

This is how we used to play the game...
Won't get stagnet like flat rate can, and doesn't blow out super-fast like escalating often does.

But for now I'll settle for Std, Seq, Classic, and combo the rest!

And I'm starting to discover Doubles.... so Doubles, Seq, Classic, & combo the rest works too....

AndrewB wrote:

Pedronicus wrote:Also - I'd like to point out that Elite games aren't mine - they are for everyone with over 1600 points

LOL, now you lost me, what the hell is Elite games? I thought it's any game, where there is at least 1 player with 1600+ points...

No - the Elite games are games set up to look like a tournament game with the title of 'Elite' next to them in the private games. They all have the same password - (which Scorba sent out to everyone in the top of the leaderboard)

Everyone who joins is 1600+ points - so the losses are minimised and the win rate of points increased. I thought you would of known about this by now.

thats strange, i didnt get any password, and im above 1600 points

Bad Speler wrote:thats strange, i didnt get any password, and im above 1600 points

Oh nuts... you weren't supposed to hear about it... there was a vote, and it was unanimous that you wouldn't be told... just kidding...

Perhaps your score was below 1600 when the messages went out.