Conquer Club

Sorry, there are several disadvantages as it is when missing a turn. I don't think that the deferred armies will change anytime soon. On another note, if you break his bonus, then he wont receive the deferred troops for it when his next turn rolls around. Moving torejected.

Please put an end to this rediculous reward. If a player signs up to play a casual game, and can't take his/her turn within 24 hours they should not be rewarded deferred troops. This has now become a strategy for some players! It needs to stop!

69er wrote:Please put an end to this rediculous reward. If a player signs up to play a casual game, and can't take his/her turn within 24 hours they should not be rewarded deferred troops. This has now become a strategy for some players! It needs to stop!

i agree

why? i love when they miss there turns in my games because i play city mougal and you dont get you auto deploys when they miss there turns so they lose at least 50 troops.

It's not really a reward, in games with auto deploy or lots of territories you usually end up losing out on troops when you miss a turn. I miss the occassional turn and have only rarely benefited from the deferred troops.

69er wrote:Please put an end to this rediculous reward. If a player signs up to play a casual game, and can't take his/her turn within 24 hours they should not be rewarded deferred troops. This has now become a strategy for some players! It needs to stop!

maybe this would do better in the suggestions forum...-the black jesus

69er wrote:Please put an end to this rediculous reward. If a player signs up to play a casual game, and can't take his/her turn within 24 hours they should not be rewarded deferred troops. This has now become a strategy for some players! It needs to stop!

If players are using this as a "strategy", they are fools. It is a failed strategy which simply will lose far more often than it wins. You simply need to take advantage of their absence, so that it is even more of a disadvantage.

69er wrote:Please put an end to this rediculous reward. If a player signs up to play a casual game, and can't take his/her turn within 24 hours they should not be rewarded deferred troops. This has now become a strategy for some players! It needs to stop!

Sorry to say, this has been suggested numerous times. It is not going to go away anytime soon.

-rd

Merged threads relating to Deferred troops altogether.

In one v one games the deferred troop bonus does not exist. If anything, it delays the inevitable. However, I still can see a few situations where one-v-one games a player could use the missed turn strategy to their benefit.

In multi player games, the missed turn benefit can be massive in escalating games. It can also be beneficial in speed games.

Another benefit is that the armies (while withheld for one round) cannot be attacked and therefore cannot be "lost." The dice will not affect those armies.

Missing a turn is punitive enough. I love it when opponents miss turns, especially in team games. Missing a turn disadvantages them further. True, armies off the board can't be attacked, but they can't be used on the attack that turn, either, make a player lose a tempo.

Missing a turn in Escalating can be harmful, especially since it means losing a chance to take a card. If players are missing turns because they think doing so will help them win the game, then by all means, please keep the policy as it is. =)

macbone wrote:Missing a turn is punitive enough. I love it when opponents miss turns, especially in team games. Missing a turn disadvantages them further. True, armies off the board can't be attacked, but they can't be used on the attack that turn, either, make a player lose a tempo.

Missing a turn in Escalating can be harmful, especially since it means losing a chance to take a card. If players are missing turns because they think doing so will help them win the game, then by all means, please keep the policy as it is. =)

What if it is a quads game on a small map with no spoils? Every player gets 3 armies per turn. If landlocked behind your own teammates, you could miss your turns and wait to drop 9 armies on one of your teammates on the front lines after you missed two turns. Could be beneficial. I'm just saying.

Queen_Herpes wrote:

macbone wrote:Missing a turn is punitive enough. I love it when opponents miss turns, especially in team games. Missing a turn disadvantages them further. True, armies off the board can't be attacked, but they can't be used on the attack that turn, either, make a player lose a tempo.

Missing a turn in Escalating can be harmful, especially since it means losing a chance to take a card. If players are missing turns because they think doing so will help them win the game, then by all means, please keep the policy as it is. =)

What if it is a quads game on a small map with no spoils? Every player gets 3 armies per turn. If landlocked behind your own teammates, you could miss your turns and wait to drop 9 armies on one of your teammates on the front lines after you missed two turns. Could be beneficial. I'm just saying.

Yeah, what happens with any map that uses Auto Deploy? Feudal War/Epic, Lunar, AoR1/2/3, The Cupcake on Conquerman, Das Schloss. I could go on. You are already put at a disadvantage because you don't get Auto deploy troops as deferred, they are gone.

Can also combat missing turns by just deploying and ending their turn. Nothing really different.

THE DEBATE RAGES ON, I see...

TheForgivenOne wrote:

Queen_Herpes wrote:

macbone wrote:Missing a turn is punitive enough. I love it when opponents miss turns, especially in team games. Missing a turn disadvantages them further. True, armies off the board can't be attacked, but they can't be used on the attack that turn, either, make a player lose a tempo.

Missing a turn in Escalating can be harmful, especially since it means losing a chance to take a card. If players are missing turns because they think doing so will help them win the game, then by all means, please keep the policy as it is. =)

What if it is a quads game on a small map with no spoils? Every player gets 3 armies per turn. If landlocked behind your own teammates, you could miss your turns and wait to drop 9 armies on one of your teammates on the front lines after you missed two turns. Could be beneficial. I'm just saying.

Yeah, what happens with any map that uses Auto Deploy? Feudal War/Epic, Lunar, AoR1/2/3, The Cupcake on Conquerman, Das Schloss. I could go on. You are already put at a disadvantage because you don't get Auto deploy troops as deferred, they are gone.

...and your point is? The are certainly situations where missing turns is not beneficial, but those that exist do not counter the reality that there exist settings and maps where there is a benefit to missing the turns.

TFO wrote:Can also combat missing turns by just deploying and ending their turn. Nothing really different.

Nothing really different? You are completely wrong. They do not deploy and end their turn because there are strategic benefits missing the turn in a variety of situations with a variety of settings on a variety of maps.

Queen_Herpes wrote:Nothing really different? You are completely wrong. They do not deploy and end their turn because there are strategic benefits missing the turn in a variety of situations with a variety of settings on a variety of maps.

Since you are such a big proponent of this, could you provide 5 concrete situations where missing a turn gives an advantage.

Queen_Herpes wrote:

TFO wrote:Can also combat missing turns by just deploying and ending their turn. Nothing really different.

Nothing really different? You are completely wrong. They do not deploy and end their turn because there are strategic benefits missing the turn in a variety of situations with a variety of settings on a variety of maps.

How so? You and your teammates all deploy on the frontline for 2 turns, he misses two then deploys the deferred on their front line.

And while you are missing you can easily be eliminated. Poof, no more troops coming from them.

Darwins_Bane wrote:

Queen_Herpes wrote:Nothing really different? You are completely wrong. They do not deploy and end their turn because there are strategic benefits missing the turn in a variety of situations with a variety of settings on a variety of maps.

Since you are such a big proponent of this, could you provide 5 concrete situations where missing a turn gives an advantage.

I only need to supply one. I'll do my best to come up with more, but you, DB, and you, TFO, seem to be asking me to describe the blackness of the iron pot.

ex.1.
Any team game on Classic, but lets look at a quads game. Player one on Team One has an army in Sydney, while his
teammate(s) dropped and hold Perth, Port Moresby, Jakarta, Bangkok, Mumbai, Hong Kong in a spattering that would give none of his teammates the opportunity to hold the Oceania bonus. Essentially, Player one's team has a lock on the Oceania Bonus, but it would require attacking all three teammates for one of those teammates to garner the bonus. IMHO, Team One would be better focused upon the enemy and other bonuses. The army in Sydney is sufficiently insulated from attack from Team Two such that Player one wouldn't realistically feel threatened that he could/would be taken out.
Still in this example:
Scenario a.
Escalating Spoils: Player One attacks with his forward units (those not locked in Sydney) and gains one territ per turn, earning one spoil per turn until he has 5 cards. Everyone else in the game also earns 5 cards, but, remember, player one went first. Being a smart player one, he knows that if he takes his turn he will receive the least reward when cashing his spoils if he is to cash first. So, smartly, he intentionally misses his turn. Perhaps Playa 1 on Team 2 is smart and misses his turn as well, but lets pretend that Playa 1, Team 2 cashes. Automatically, Player One, Team one is in a better position. Certainly, he risks losing his cards to elimination, but his teammates will have a better shot at grabbing his cards (seeing as Player One is locked in the corner in Sydney behind his teammates.) Certainly, this could be considered a deferred card bonus and not a deferred troop bonus. However, the deferred troops certainly aren't a negative. Player One still gets to drop those extra 3 (or more) troops wherever he wishes upon the board at the end of his turn.
Scenario b.
Escalating Spoils: Player One gets the five cards and for whatever reason, not everyone else lands 5 cards. Player One then bides his time. Misses one turn to see what happens, misses a second turn to see what happens, and upon his third turn, player one has the choice to miss his third turn, and turn over his five cards and all of his territories to one of his teammates. Here, now, you could argue that the end benefit would be to turn over cards and territoried armies to a teammate. You could argue that this is not a deferred troop bonus, and that the player (and his team) lost those troops in the deferral because player one missed all three turns. However, on each of those turns, player one could use the strategy of missing the turn and wait to play to defer those troops, or wait to pass his boarded troops, territories, and cards over to a teammate. As such, player one (and his team) benefit from the knowledge that those troops are there, if necessary.

I have other ideas popping into my head and will post them as I have time. [FFA games, 1v1]

I do concede that in many situations, deferred troops are not a bonus on the AOR maps and similar maps like the Feudals where there are auto-deploys.

Queen_Herpes wrote:

TheForgivenOne wrote:

Queen_Herpes wrote:

macbone wrote:Missing a turn is punitive enough. I love it when opponents miss turns, especially in team games. Missing a turn disadvantages them further. True, armies off the board can't be attacked, but they can't be used on the attack that turn, either, make a player lose a tempo.

Missing a turn in Escalating can be harmful, especially since it means losing a chance to take a card. If players are missing turns because they think doing so will help them win the game, then by all means, please keep the policy as it is. =)

What if it is a quads game on a small map with no spoils? Every player gets 3 armies per turn. If landlocked behind your own teammates, you could miss your turns and wait to drop 9 armies on one of your teammates on the front lines after you missed two turns. Could be beneficial. I'm just saying.

Yeah, what happens with any map that uses Auto Deploy? Feudal War/Epic, Lunar, AoR1/2/3, The Cupcake on Conquerman, Das Schloss. I could go on. You are already put at a disadvantage because you don't get Auto deploy troops as deferred, they are gone.

...and your point is? The are certainly situations where missing turns is not beneficial, but those that exist do not counter the reality that there exist settings and maps where there is a benefit to missing the turns.

Wait, wait, wait...you're decrying his use of "certain situations" when his response was directly to your own use of "certain situations"?

Queen_Herpes wrote:

TFO wrote:Can also combat missing turns by just deploying and ending their turn. Nothing really different.

Nothing really different? You are completely wrong. They do not deploy and end their turn because there are strategic benefits missing the turn in a variety of situations with a variety of settings on a variety of maps.

There are some very few circumstances when it can possibly be a winning strategy. They are very few.

CC says you should take your turns (no deadbeat rule.)

CC allows players to designate substitutes (and does not prevent anyone from having a regular sub who checks any games just in case.)

Eliminating deferred troops just makes it fair for the players who had to wait the additional portion of the round for a player who didn't play... and would be consistent with ANY OTHER GAME where, if you skip, you do NOT get the benefit of receiving any portion of what you would have received if you had not skipped.

Would it suck to have an emergency that caused you to miss your turn? Yes. But since CC allows ways around totally missing a turn, CC's rules should not be designed to benefit you for missing your turn despite those methods that can prevent it.

In other words: I support the OP's request to eliminate all deferred troops, whether the miss was intentional or not.

stahrgazer wrote:Eliminating deferred troops just makes it fair for the players who had to wait the additional portion of the round for a player who didn't play... and would be consistent with ANY OTHER GAME where, if you skip, you do NOT get the benefit of receiving any portion of what you would have received if you had not skipped.

i play on another Risk-like gaming site and they also give you deferred troops so for me allowing deferred troops IS consistent with EVERY OTHER GAME site that i know

Queen_Herpes wrote:
...and your point is? The are certainly situations where missing turns is not beneficial, but those that exist do not counter the reality that there exist settings and maps where there is a benefit to missing the turns.

So what? You're allowed to come up with a "once in a blue moon" situation, but I'm not? Just because 0.01% of the time when a player misses his turn, they may come out in the positive, does not mean that we should Overhaul the whole deferred troops to negate the 99.9% of the time it doesn't. And what incentive is it for a player to come back if they miss their turn and have no troops to make up for it? I would probably deadbeat out of the game if something like that were to happen, and once Newer players realized this, they probably wouldn't come back either.

stahrgazer wrote:CC says you should take your turns (no deadbeat rule.)
CC allows players to designate substitutes (and does not prevent anyone from having a regular sub who checks any games just in case.)
Eliminating deferred troops just makes it fair for the players who had to wait the additional portion of the round for a player who didn't play... and would be consistent with ANY OTHER GAME where, if you skip, you do NOT get the benefit of receiving any portion of what you would have received if you had not skipped.
Would it suck to have an emergency that caused you to miss your turn? Yes. But since CC allows ways around totally missing a turn, CC's rules should not be designed to benefit you for missing your turn despite those methods that can prevent it.
In other words: I support the OP's request to eliminate all deferred troops, whether the miss was intentional or not.

I believe that anyone who gives out their password to another individual is a flaming idiot who is just an accident waiting to happen. Your stance would virtually REQUIRE me to give someone my password. Bad plan.

TheForgivenOne wrote:

Queen_Herpes wrote:
...and your point is? The are certainly situations where missing turns is not beneficial, but those that exist do not counter the reality that there exist settings and maps where there is a benefit to missing the turns.

So what? You're allowed to come up with a "once in a blue moon" situation, but I'm not? Just because 0.01% of the time when a player misses his turn, they may come out in the positive, does not mean that we should Overhaul the whole deferred troops to negate the 99.9% of the time it doesn't. And what incentive is it for a player to come back if they miss their turn and have no troops to make up for it? I would probably deadbeat out of the game if something like that were to happen, and once Newer players realized this, they probably wouldn't come back either.

Once in a blue moon the red-red-red set is beneficial in a flat rate game, yet it is recognized as a benefit: BECAUSE IT IS.

Queen_Herpes wrote:

TheForgivenOne wrote:

Queen_Herpes wrote:
...and your point is? The are certainly situations where missing turns is not beneficial, but those that exist do not counter the reality that there exist settings and maps where there is a benefit to missing the turns.

So what? You're allowed to come up with a "once in a blue moon" situation, but I'm not? Just because 0.01% of the time when a player misses his turn, they may come out in the positive, does not mean that we should Overhaul the whole deferred troops to negate the 99.9% of the time it doesn't. And what incentive is it for a player to come back if they miss their turn and have no troops to make up for it? I would probably deadbeat out of the game if something like that were to happen, and once Newer players realized this, they probably wouldn't come back either.

Once in a blue moon the red-red-red set is beneficial in a flat rate game, yet it is recognized as a benefit: BECAUSE IT IS.

Every escalating game ever created really doesn't equate to "once in a blue moon".