Adjacent Attacks

[n00blet]

or when a ssex tape is released about you
then you have to shave your head for re-initiation

Oh, I already have a few of those...

WHAT?
i was googling for 3 hours and found nothing!!!!

Search "Backdoor Sluts 9"

Southpark......anyone?

[a.sub]

or when a ssex tape is released about you
then you have to shave your head for re-initiation

Oh, I already have a few of those...

WHAT?
i was googling for 3 hours and found nothing!!!!

Search "Backdoor Sluts 9"
Southpark......anyone?

that was amazing

[n00blet]

or when a ssex tape is released about you
then you have to shave your head for re-initiation

Oh, I already have a few of those...

WHAT?
i was googling for 3 hours and found nothing!!!!

Search "Backdoor Sluts 9"
Southpark......anyone?

that was amazing

I make Crotch Capers 3 look like Naughty Nurses 2

[a.sub]

can i get a private viewing

[denominator]

Well since I got absolutely rocked in that freestyle game, and so did AndreiM, and a.sub has said he's interested, I created a new game. And I thought I'd use that fancy new feature:

Random Map
Sequential
7 Players
No Spoils
Adjacent Reinforcements
No Fog

Standard AA password. Again, PM me if you don't know it.

[slowreactor]

Play adjacent attacks on world 2.1.

[a.sub]

Game 5072781 Assassin
Sequential Random
Random Escalating
Chained No
AA game same password
but its assassin this time

[n00blet]

Play adjacent attacks on world 2.1.

Oh, we did that. Long and intense, no doubt about it

[SultanOfSurreal]

Play adjacent attacks on world 2.1.

Oh, we did that. Long and intense, no doubt about it

I wanna try that...

the game we're in now is already fairly interminable though.

[4myGod]

Where would this option be under in the new games menu?

[grandin]

I'm sorry, but i don't have the energy to read through 29 pages of replies. Maybe my thoughts on this subject have already been said, if so i do apologize, but anyway, here it goes:

I have a fairly new version of the traditional Risk board game, where this is incorporated, albeit in a slightly different manner:

When attacking, no matter how many troops you have, you are only allowed to use 3 at a time, and the defender can only use 2 at a time. You can attack over and over again, if you feel like it. So, an attack from, say... a territory with 10 troops against one with 6 defenders, could look something like this:

3v2, 1v2, 0v2
[new attack] (...or stop attacking)
3v2,3v0
[new attack]
3v2,3v0
[new attack]
3v2,2v1,1v1,1v0
[attacker win]

(...you're also not allowed to quit an attack 'midfight', as in until the attacking 3 or defending 2 has been eliminated)

Now, since the attacker only has one troop in 'attacking mode' after the win, this is of course the only troop thats allowed in the conquered territory (before ending attacks and going into reinforcement mode), and the 'home' territory has 4 troops left. Hm, do you get it? I'm not the best at explaining.

At the most, an attacker can have 3 troops in a conquered territory directly after a win, and if he feels like it he could of course use two of them for a continued attack beoynd this territory. But in reality this is a way of playing with adjacent attacks. And a really good one! It's very enjoyable, and it does certainly add alot of strategy when it comes to reinforcements and troop movements.

I would really like to see adjacent attacks incorporated in this way.

This is also said to equalize odds between attacker and defender, which is otherwise slightly in benefit of the attacker. I don't know the math behind this statement, it's only something that i've read.

.

[yeti_c]

This bit...

(...you're also not allowed to quit an attack 'midfight', as in until the attacking 3 or defending 2 has been eliminated)

Completely ruins the new rules for me.

C.

[slowreactor]

Play adjacent attacks on world 2.1.

Oh, we did that. Long and intense, no doubt about it

I wanna try that...

the game we're in now is already fairly interminable though.

Game 1204465

Beat that.

[n00blet]

When attacking, no matter how many troops you have, you are only allowed to use 3 at a time, and the defender can only use 2 at a time.

Do you mean 3 dice v 2 dice, or 3 troops v 2 troops? If it's the former, I don't see how much difference this makes, besides making it virtually impossible to hold any territories you have conquered (since you can only advance a maximum of ?3?). If it's the latter, then I expect that would be quite frustrating for a lot of people, because those odds are not good for the attacker at alllll.

This bit...

(...you're also not allowed to quit an attack 'midfight', as in until the attacking 3 or defending 2 has been eliminated)

Completely ruins the new rules for me.

C.

I think I would agree with yeti on this one, unless I'm completely misunderstanding what you suggested?

[OliverFA]

I just tried to think how it would be to program this in wathever language CC is coded:

1 - When the players hits the "Begin Turn" button, create a list and populate it with all the territories currently owned by that player. Make it an sorted list to increase speed.

2 - Each time the system is about to populate the "Assault from" drop down, calculate it in the normal way as it is done now. But include an extra comprobation to check if the territory is in the sorted list created in 1.

3 - When the player hits the "End Turn" button, scrap the list created in 1.

With this we cover ALL possible cases, it's easy to program (cheap in development time and effort) and won't slow down the system too much (looking for an item in a sorted list should not be expensive). In exchange for this small prize, CC would get a brand new and completely different gaming mode.

[denominator]

From my understanding, Oliver, that would work. The only issue you'll run into and have to reprogram are the killer neutrals, like those on Arm's Race!. In that case you have to be allowed to advance or the game would never end.

Speaking of which, shall we play a game on Arm's Race!?

[OliverFA]

From my understanding, Oliver, that would work. The only issue you'll run into and have to reprogram are the killer neutrals, like those on Arm's Race!. In that case you have to be allowed to advance or the game would never end.

Speaking of which, shall we play a game on Arm's Race!?

Or... don't allow certain maps such as Arms Race to be played in this setting.

Why? Because to my understanding (correct me if I am wrong) it is much more easier to say "this map cannot be played with this setting" than to program a completely different logic for that kind of maps. My 3 easy points would become a bigger list and the development time would increase. I was looking for something chep, easy and fast. If we complicate it too much I am afraid this will never be done.

Of course. Arms Race and similar maps could always be included in Adjacent Attacks V2.

[n00blet]

From my understanding, Oliver, that would work. The only issue you'll run into and have to reprogram are the killer neutrals, like those on Arm's Race!. In that case you have to be allowed to advance or the game would never end.

Speaking of which, shall we play a game on Arm's Race!?

Or... don't allow certain maps such as Arms Race to be played in this setting.

Why? Because to my understanding (correct me if I am wrong) it is much more easier to say "this map cannot be played with this setting" than to program a completely different logic for that kind of maps. My 3 easy points would become a bigger list and the development time would increase. I was looking for something chep, easy and fast. If we complicate it too much I am afraid this will never be done.

Of course. Arms Race and similar maps could always be included in Adjacent Attacks V2.

The way I thought about the code, is simply make an attack list (which is write-protected for additions) at the beginning of the player's turn, which includes the territories they start with, and all the killer neutral territories on the map.

That way, if they attack through to a killer neutral, that territory is already on the list of territories they're allowed to attack from, so it wouldn't require any change in code.

Also, the reason I said "write-protected for additions" is that in Freestyle play, you could lose a territory before you deployed, but after you started your turn, and if the list of territories you were allowed to attack from included that territory, then you'd be able to attack through it. To avoid this, whenever the player presses the "Assault" button, the list should be rechecked so that if a territory has been lost, it is removed from the list.

That last bit would take a tad bit more coding, but shouldn't be terribly difficult I'd think, strictly speaking from my own background in coding.

As for the Arms Race! Game, there were some in the AA Tournament, and I was extraordinarily jealous. I vote yes

[72o]

I used to play the board game this way when I was a kid. We called it the "no plowing" rule. You couldn't plow through territories one after the other, you could only advance your borders one territory at a time.

It made for fun games. Escalating games couldn't be won by the steamrolling effect.

[sully800]

No plowing is a fun, but pretty accurate description.

Anyone want to set up a ConquerMan game? I think we talked about it before, but it could be a lot of fun!

Slash a huge stalemate.

[SuicidalSnowman]

Hey guys, I'm back from my brief CC hiatus and would love to get a few AA games up and running.

Also awesome that some new people have joined up.

[Falkomagno]

I like this idea too. More options never is a bad thing

[n00blet]

I like this idea too. More options never is a bad thing

Fresh blood sure does invigorate these old and tired vets

As for that conquerman game... Game 5586762

Standard pw. If you don't know it, pm me for it

[SuicidalSnowman]

As much as I hate Conquerman, and as much as I think AA is probably going to make this a rough game, I am in.

[ubersky]

Anyone know if we've gotten an official stance on this Idea? We've been playtesting it for a while. I'd like to know if Lack will at least consider to put it on the To-Do list as a game option