Conquer Club

sonicsteve wrote:. the word consecutively, should actually be respectively I think. OR, something more like "Horseshoes & Power Buttons one-way attack their own cards; Each card space is a dead-end. Hold all group symbols for bonus", and back that up by putting the symbols on the cards.

yeah will change that.

sonicsteve wrote:2. the autodeploys could be more clearly shown in the rules by having the free army symbol just saying +1 autodeploy in the text next to it and the cc symbol with a +2 autodeploy.

will do.

sonicsteve wrote:3. Should the attack-multis square have an army circle on it?

V2 does.

sonicsteve wrote:4. If you do want to use battleship names, just get rid of the 'battleship x' and replace with relatively short names of battle ships. 'HMS Victory' or 'HMS Valiant' should easily fit in, 'USS Arizona', 'USS Iowa' or 'USS Maine' would be no problem and 'Potemkin' could be a contender. The battleship graphic could be a lot better, but I guess that comes later.

Actually potemkin came to my mind. and that is a good idea.

will implement these in one go when i get the moody graphic from stahr.

Hurrah! I could never do those graphics stuffs...Glad someone stepped up.

TheSaxlad wrote:
Actually potemkin came to my mind. and that is a good idea.

will implement these in one go when i get the moody graphic from stahr.

cool, thanks for taking this on board.

Battleship was a M-piece. Rails were used on the original set.

We have several Rail Maps that could be used: Rail USA, Rail Europe, Rail Africa, Rail Australia.

Or, Intensity Cubes (Dice) could replace it, because honestly, I'm not seeing CC out of Battleships.

Sax has the image, the large one even, so he can use as is or reduce as needed (better quality that way)

New Version Up

Please Comment

if you roll doubles, do you get to go again?

"Free Troop" if you want to use official Lingo on CC. And I like "Bust Multis" better than attack multis.

I thought the horseshoes were pretzels at first.

Moreover, you have "Sugs and Bugs" and then "Bug Reports."

Also, "Tournaments" seem more important than PMs or Walls. And "Chatter" and "Live Chat"---having both---seems unnecessary. I'd stick with Live Chat.

For the railroad/battleships, why not keep with the transportation theme---say a car---and have it be "Club Service" or something?


--Andy

Or you could use names of ships that are on maps.

USS Galena (American Civil War)
Edward Vernon (Caribbean Islands)
RAN Hobart (WWII Australia)
Classis Moesica (Imperium Romanum)

the horseshoes look kinda weird maybe just have 1 instead of 2.

AndyDufresne wrote:"Free Troop" if you want to use official Lingo on CC. And I like "Bust Multis" better than attack multis.

I thought the horseshoes were pretzels at first.

Moreover, you have "Sugs and Bugs" and then "Bug Reports."

Also, "Tournaments" seem more important than PMs or Walls. And "Chatter" and "Live Chat"---having both---seems unnecessary. I'd stick with Live Chat.

For the railroad/battleships, why not keep with the transportation theme---say a car---and have it be "Club Service" or something?


--Andy

Yeah thats all good stuff, i see the popular opinion is set against the battleships so their going... any names for cars or just club service 1,2,3,4?

army of nobunaga wrote:if you roll doubles, do you get to go again?

can it be written in to the xml? No.

Everyone has great advice, thanks guys.
However everyone seems to have missed the territ I forgot to name on the orange... will put that right as well.

What if you had 8 playing pieces on GO? They cannot be attacked, and they all get an auto deploy. Instead of trying to totally kill each other off, you are eliminated by spending at least one turn without having troops outside of GO. I'm not sure about the programming for that part, so that could be changed to something like the objective of the game is to own all territs out side of GO.

Players would have to go around the board, with the one way attack idea. It was mentioned that being able to attack up to 12 spaces would be a fiasco, but I think I have a way around that. Assign each territory two numbers, 2-12.(this would be similar to the two dice used in M*nonpoly) The territory that is the designated number of spaces away may be attacked (one way of course). This would force players to travel around the board multiple times, trying to fight their way to a m*nopoly.

Keep it up! I want to play

Super Nova wrote:What if you had 8 playing pieces on GO? They cannot be attacked, and they all get an auto deploy. Instead of trying to totally kill each other off, you are eliminated by spending at least one turn without having troops outside of GO. I'm not sure about the programming for that part, so that could be changed to something like the objective of the game is to own all territs out side of GO.

Keep it up! I want to play

Ok, this might work with the new capital objectives lacks stuck in... once you have no pieces on the board you are eliminated. However...

They have to be able to attack something or do something otherwise there is no point in them being there. IMHO I like it the way it is at the moment. But if anyone has a way to get around this im open to suggestions...

Grr... fastposted:

Super Nova wrote:What if you had 8 playing pieces on GO? They cannot be attacked, and they all get an auto deploy. Instead of trying to totally kill each other off, you are eliminated by spending at least one turn without having troops outside of GO. I'm not sure about the programming for that part, so that could be changed to something like the objective of the game is to own all territs out side of GO.

Players would have to go around the board, with the one way attack idea. It was mentioned that being able to attack up to 12 spaces would be a fiasco, but I think I have a way around that. Assign each territory two numbers, 2-12.(this would be similar to the two dice used in M*nonpoly) The territory that is the designated number of spaces away may be attacked (one way of course). This would force players to travel around the board multiple times, trying to fight their way to a m*nopoly.

Keep it up! I want to play

You could use the new xml update! You could have each player start out with a piece and if you lose it, you're dead. You could have it so that no pieces can attack each other and maybe replace and move around the Dead Beat spaces with "Attack Pieces" spaces (obviously that's a terrible name, so it's be called something different). Idk... Just a thought...

Victor Sullivan wrote:Grr... fastposted:

Super Nova wrote:What if you had 8 playing pieces on GO? They cannot be attacked, and they all get an auto deploy. Instead of trying to totally kill each other off, you are eliminated by spending at least one turn without having troops outside of GO. I'm not sure about the programming for that part, so that could be changed to something like the objective of the game is to own all territs out side of GO.

Players would have to go around the board, with the one way attack idea. It was mentioned that being able to attack up to 12 spaces would be a fiasco, but I think I have a way around that. Assign each territory two numbers, 2-12.(this would be similar to the two dice used in M*nonpoly) The territory that is the designated number of spaces away may be attacked (one way of course). This would force players to travel around the board multiple times, trying to fight their way to a m*nopoly.

Keep it up! I want to play

You could use the new xml update! You could have each player start out with a piece and if you lose it, you're dead. You could have it so that no pieces can attack each other and maybe replace and move around the Dead Beat spaces with "Attack Pieces" spaces (obviously that's a terrible name, so it's be called something different). Idk... Just a thought...

Oh hang on.

if I was to put m*nopoly pieces around the board and you have to keep your m*nopoly piece, as well as other pieces?

would that work?

TheSaxlad wrote:

Victor Sullivan wrote:Grr... fastposted:

Super Nova wrote:What if you had 8 playing pieces on GO? They cannot be attacked, and they all get an auto deploy. Instead of trying to totally kill each other off, you are eliminated by spending at least one turn without having troops outside of GO. I'm not sure about the programming for that part, so that could be changed to something like the objective of the game is to own all territs out side of GO.

Players would have to go around the board, with the one way attack idea. It was mentioned that being able to attack up to 12 spaces would be a fiasco, but I think I have a way around that. Assign each territory two numbers, 2-12.(this would be similar to the two dice used in M*nonpoly) The territory that is the designated number of spaces away may be attacked (one way of course). This would force players to travel around the board multiple times, trying to fight their way to a m*nopoly.

Keep it up! I want to play

You could use the new xml update! You could have each player start out with a piece and if you lose it, you're dead. You could have it so that no pieces can attack each other and maybe replace and move around the Dead Beat spaces with "Attack Pieces" spaces (obviously that's a terrible name, so it's be called something different). Idk... Just a thought...

Oh hang on.

if I was to put m*nopoly pieces around the board and you have to keep your m*nopoly piece, as well as other pieces?

would that work?

Indeed it would. I could do the xml when the time comes, by the way.

Victor Sullivan wrote:

TheSaxlad wrote:

Victor Sullivan wrote:Grr... fastposted:

Super Nova wrote:What if you had 8 playing pieces on GO? They cannot be attacked, and they all get an auto deploy. Instead of trying to totally kill each other off, you are eliminated by spending at least one turn without having troops outside of GO. I'm not sure about the programming for that part, so that could be changed to something like the objective of the game is to own all territs out side of GO.

Players would have to go around the board, with the one way attack idea. It was mentioned that being able to attack up to 12 spaces would be a fiasco, but I think I have a way around that. Assign each territory two numbers, 2-12.(this would be similar to the two dice used in M*nonpoly) The territory that is the designated number of spaces away may be attacked (one way of course). This would force players to travel around the board multiple times, trying to fight their way to a m*nopoly.

Keep it up! I want to play

You could use the new xml update! You could have each player start out with a piece and if you lose it, you're dead. You could have it so that no pieces can attack each other and maybe replace and move around the Dead Beat spaces with "Attack Pieces" spaces (obviously that's a terrible name, so it's be called something different). Idk... Just a thought...

Oh hang on.

if I was to put m*nopoly pieces around the board and you have to keep your m*nopoly piece, as well as other pieces?

would that work?

Indeed it would. I could do the xml when the time comes, by the way.

Victor. This is not actually my idea.

This is Gilligans Idea and i offered to do the GFX...

Sorry...

The programming part, not the concept part. I completely respect whatever Gilligan wants to do with his map. Not trying to overthrow him by any means.

Yeah Gilligan said he wanted to do the xml...

so lets make it a bitch shall we?



P.S love you really gilligan...

TheSaxlad wrote:Yeah Gilligan said he wanted to do the xml...

so lets make it a bitch shall we?



P.S love you really gilligan...

It's all good. I just find xml strangely fun Anyways... I noticed you didn't address all my points in my first post. You think you could?

There should be a way to "Toss" the board. When I am losing a board game in real life, I like to stand up and just toss the board over and storm off.

TheSaxlad wrote:

Victor Sullivan wrote:Grr... fastposted:

Super Nova wrote:What if you had 8 playing pieces on GO? They cannot be attacked, and they all get an auto deploy. Instead of trying to totally kill each other off, you are eliminated by spending at least one turn without having troops outside of GO. I'm not sure about the programming for that part, so that could be changed to something like the objective of the game is to own all territs out side of GO.

Players would have to go around the board, with the one way attack idea. It was mentioned that being able to attack up to 12 spaces would be a fiasco, but I think I have a way around that. Assign each territory two numbers, 2-12.(this would be similar to the two dice used in M*nonpoly) The territory that is the designated number of spaces away may be attacked (one way of course). This would force players to travel around the board multiple times, trying to fight their way to a m*nopoly.

Keep it up! I want to play

You could use the new xml update! You could have each player start out with a piece and if you lose it, you're dead. You could have it so that no pieces can attack each other and maybe replace and move around the Dead Beat spaces with "Attack Pieces" spaces (obviously that's a terrible name, so it's be called something different). Idk... Just a thought...

Oh hang on.

if I was to put m*nopoly pieces around the board and you have to keep your m*nopoly piece, as well as other pieces?

would that work?

I have one reservation with implementing this,

when you start on a coloured square, this will automatically make it impossible for anyone to take the bonus. without killing you of course, this could produce massive stalemates.

any thoughts on how to rectify this?

TheSaxlad wrote:

TheSaxlad wrote:

Victor Sullivan wrote:Grr... fastposted:

Super Nova wrote:What if you had 8 playing pieces on GO? They cannot be attacked, and they all get an auto deploy. Instead of trying to totally kill each other off, you are eliminated by spending at least one turn without having troops outside of GO. I'm not sure about the programming for that part, so that could be changed to something like the objective of the game is to own all territs out side of GO.

Players would have to go around the board, with the one way attack idea. It was mentioned that being able to attack up to 12 spaces would be a fiasco, but I think I have a way around that. Assign each territory two numbers, 2-12.(this would be similar to the two dice used in M*nonpoly) The territory that is the designated number of spaces away may be attacked (one way of course). This would force players to travel around the board multiple times, trying to fight their way to a m*nopoly.

Keep it up! I want to play

You could use the new xml update! You could have each player start out with a piece and if you lose it, you're dead. You could have it so that no pieces can attack each other and maybe replace and move around the Dead Beat spaces with "Attack Pieces" spaces (obviously that's a terrible name, so it's be called something different). Idk... Just a thought...

Oh hang on.

if I was to put m*nopoly pieces around the board and you have to keep your m*nopoly piece, as well as other pieces?

would that work?

I have one reservation with implementing this,

when you start on a coloured square, this will automatically make it impossible for anyone to take the bonus. without killing you of course, this could produce massive stalemates.

any thoughts on how to rectify this?

Good point...and likewise, if you start off on a power square, you would get a disadvantage/advantage right off of the bat.

Wow there's a lot of quotes...

Gilligan wrote:

TheSaxlad wrote:

TheSaxlad wrote:

Victor Sullivan wrote:Grr... fastposted:

Super Nova wrote:What if you had 8 playing pieces on GO? They cannot be attacked, and they all get an auto deploy. Instead of trying to totally kill each other off, you are eliminated by spending at least one turn without having troops outside of GO. I'm not sure about the programming for that part, so that could be changed to something like the objective of the game is to own all territs out side of GO.

Players would have to go around the board, with the one way attack idea. It was mentioned that being able to attack up to 12 spaces would be a fiasco, but I think I have a way around that. Assign each territory two numbers, 2-12.(this would be similar to the two dice used in M*nonpoly) The territory that is the designated number of spaces away may be attacked (one way of course). This would force players to travel around the board multiple times, trying to fight their way to a m*nopoly.

Keep it up! I want to play

You could use the new xml update! You could have each player start out with a piece and if you lose it, you're dead. You could have it so that no pieces can attack each other and maybe replace and move around the Dead Beat spaces with "Attack Pieces" spaces (obviously that's a terrible name, so it's be called something different). Idk... Just a thought...

Oh hang on.

if I was to put m*nopoly pieces around the board and you have to keep your m*nopoly piece, as well as other pieces?

would that work?

I have one reservation with implementing this,

when you start on a coloured square, this will automatically make it impossible for anyone to take the bonus. without killing you of course, this could produce massive stalemates.

any thoughts on how to rectify this?

Good point...and likewise, if you start off on a power square, you would get a disadvantage/advantage right off of the bat.

Rather than starting on properties or power squares, only start on your playing piece. Have each playing piece be able to attack different properties, and players would have to go around the board before they can even start attacking each other. If you want to make it so that players can attack other playing pieces, do something like having a square with a sizable killer neutral on it that can attack the playing pieces. (like Sullivan mentioned)

I take it making 8 individual footsteps (1 neutral to start, decay to neutral after) for each square is out of the question, eh? Because this could play like the real thing, in which players run around in circles and one-way attack territories they want. Unfortunately, it would be so incredibly messy.

Perhaps we can have the eight pieces scattered on boards, but they can ONLY attack Go and have no affiliation with the space they are located on.

If that becomes confusing, we can just throw them somewhere on the board that isn't on a space.

Then, perhaps Free Parking can attack the pieces directly.