Chariot of Fire wrote:Just for the record......
"Conquer Club is not associated with Risk! or Hasbro in any way"
Thanks denominator for those good counter arguments of why this game doesn't totally replicate the board game we all know (I wouldn't have thought of those).
Let's take a scenario, e.g. Middle Ages, where I have 4 cards (one of which is my palace and might have to be traded if I win a 5th card of the wrong colour). Do you really expect me to win another card? Or should I just sit out the rest of the game and not attack anything?
Using Middle Ages is an extreme example, but it can apply to many other scenarios (e.g. one's own castle in Feudal, or a territory within a held bonus). It's a crippling thing to have been awarded cards that are so detrimental that one doesn't want to cash them. Thus it's pretty cruel to deprive a player of the one means he has of staying competitive in the game - and that only means is by attacking and timing out.
Deliberate timing out to save one's skin and stay in the game (coz we all play to win I assume) certainly isn't as cheap as farming for points or medals.
while i agree with ljex sentiment, i feel that this is an extremely valid point. what needs to be decided is, is this something that needs to be accepted and planned for prior to joining the game?
Surely if you got your own castle as your 2nd card, you made the choice to get two other cards, hence get 'stuck' in that situation. You therefore have an advantage over the poor sod who got his own castle as the 5th card and has no other choice than to bomb his own self.
Some would say, that it is your solemn duty to bomb your own self because it is the fair thing to do considering those that get that unluckiness on their 5th card, and dont get the choice of whether or not they should choose the loophole of timing out.
if you make timing out illegal, then it levels the playing field when comparing those two specific scenarios...... for instance.
just my two drunken pennies
