new player order......same time (not freestyle)

[BOREDGIRL]

Suggestion Idea:

Add an option for Simultaneous Play

Specifics:

Much like the variant in Risk II, all the players will take their turns inside the same 24 hour period, without knowing their enemies actions. Once the last person finishes, all the results would be shown and battles would be resolved. This process would repeat itself through all phases.

Why it is needed:

Since you wouldn't be knowing your enemies intentions until the battles
ensue. This would truly be the most realistic variant to play. And if played correctly, non time consuming.


Priority (1-5): 4

Would I be shot if I said this game play sounded interesting? lol there's so much negativity about this, and yet I think it sounds good. Really interesting, like sneak attack freestyle.

[FlyinHi]

Would I be shot if I said this game play sounded interesting? lol there's so much negativity about this, and yet I think it sounds good. Really interesting, like sneak attack freestyle.

Well I definitely wouldn't.

But seriously, the main reason it has so much negative feedback was due to the fact that when I started this thread I was new to CC and Forums altogether. And since they just told me what was wrong with my post and not how to fix it, I used the trial and error method.

However, thanks for the support.

[Shino Tenshi]

Concise description:

• Implement an option to play risk using Same-Time Risk rules as per the Risk 2.0 computer game

Specifics:

• In Same-Time Risk there are a number of phases to a turn, which each player gives their instructions for what they wish to do and the execution of these choices are done all at the same time.
• Phases include deployment, attack commands, resolving combat, and fortifications
• Players can only attack territories beside them, with the option of a single blitz command being issued that will continue the attack through to a second territory should the first go through
• Rules include alternative dice rules which allow for one die being rolled per territory you use to attack a given territory from. For example, attacking East Africa from North Africa and South Africa would have you rolling two dice vs. one die for the defender
• The alternative dice rules use 12-sided dice with the numbers 1-6 and are loaded according to the size of the army involved
• I'm sure I'm missing numerous details which I would be happy to add to this list should someone who's familiar with the rules make a post about it
• This would have to be set up as a speed game only option, perhaps under 'round length'
• Each phrase would be alloted a set amount of time... perhaps 1 to 2 minutes

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• This would add another exciting gameplay option to the site

I realize I've likely missed a lot of the aspects of the same-time rule set. Perhaps we could get some feedback for the suggestion from people who have played the same-time options in Risk 2.0 and go from there?

[4V4T4R]

I love this idea and risk 2.0... iv'e been trying to get parts of this implemented, but haven't succeeded yet. Some notes: the "battle resolutions" part is actually part of the attack phase (at the end) resolving situations where two different people attack the same territ and win, they then have to fight each other for it. Also if two players both attack each other along the same border, it is a border clash and neither has the defense advantage, so ties result in a re-roll. Also, I don't know that you need to limit this to speed games, as it would still work with a 24hr one it would just take longer.

[Greatwhite]

We used to have the same time option on MSN and some liked it, although sequential real time was probably 20 times as popular. Still would be a very cool option here.

[hifetz]

It wouldn't even have to be set up as a speed game. Each person could go around in a turn like normal, where instead of doing the attacks, it would just plan them. Once everyone ahd submitted moves, the computer could do all the work, and the next round would start.

[Natewolfman]

Concise description: Same Time Risk

• For those who used to play "Risk II" the computer game, you will know what im talking about. Same time risk is similar to Freestyle but COMPLETELY different.

Specifics:

• All players (within the 24hour limit) must submit all the attack options, including the number of units they are commiting to the attack
• You cannot chain attack, you may attack many many times, but a single line cannot keep moving (much as a normal war would be)
• There is a turn order (this just off the top of my head)
  [1]border clashes, when two players attack at eachother
  [2]mass invasions, when a contry is attacked from more then one location at a time
  [3]Invasion, your normal attacks
  [4]spoils of war, when two different players attack a contry, they must fight eachother for possession.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• Invite a new and (in many ways) improved version of true freestyle play
• To give a much more realistic view of war in general
• This (if initiated) could possibly be, the fairest setting for a game on the site.

Note: The biggest problem i see with this is the programming, im not sure if this site can handle these features, but that is for the techies to decide not me

-NateWolfman

[ParadiceCity9]

Sounds kinda confusing.

[Natewolfman]

Sounds kinda confusing.

Its not as easy to explain as it is to see...

Basically a turn would start, every player submits battle plans

EXAMPLE
Player 1: sends 3 men to attack Ontario from Western US; Sends 8 men to attack china from Siam
Player 2: sends 5 men to attack Ontario from Greenland; Sends 3 men to attack brazil from N. Africa.
and so on to all the players

Once ALL battle orders are submitted, the computer automatically does the attack, the number of men you used fight until they either win or are completely destroyed, which adds another element to the game.

[Bones2484]

I remember this. It was very fun to play and almost like a completely new game.

[lancehoch]

This was suggested about a month ago, the thread died. Link

[Natewolfman]

i see, but little opinions were given, i would like to see some opinions on this thread!

[amazzony]

Set up a poll, that always gives a good idea what people think and how much interest there is for the option.

[Simon Viavant]

Great idea! I used to play RISK2 and I liked it. I don't think it'd be practical on casual games though.

[tubaman]

I dunno if this would work. Most of the game is spent improvising. If you submit all your attacks at the start of the turn, you wouldn't be able to change your attacks according to what your opponents do.

[BaldAdonis]

I dunno if this would work. Most of the game is spent improvising. If you submit all your attacks at the start of the turn, you wouldn't be able to change your attacks according to what your opponents do.

That's where round 2 comes in

[Thezzaruz]

I dunno if this would work. Most of the game is spent improvising. If you submit all your attacks at the start of the turn, you wouldn't be able to change your attacks according to what your opponents do.

That's kind of the point. And it's a problem that all players face and as such they have to adapt their strategy to that. I'm quite sure that I prefer sequential games but it would be fun occasionally IMO.

[tubaman]

I dunno if this would work. Most of the game is spent improvising. If you submit all your attacks at the start of the turn, you wouldn't be able to change your attacks according to what your opponents do.

That's kind of the point. And it's a problem that all players face and as such they have to adapt their strategy to that. I'm quite sure that I prefer sequential games but it would be fun occasionally IMO.

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh that's the point. It's supposed to f*ck you over. Let's do it.

[Thezzaruz]

It's supposed to f*ck you over.

Are you really that afraid of not having that well coordinated, playing-at-the-same-time, team mate to back you up???


I don't think that this format would work well at all with team games so I can understand why you wouldn't want to play it but that doesn't mean it couldn't be a interesting format for single games.

[tubaman]

It's supposed to f*ck you over.

Are you really that afraid of not having that well coordinated, playing-at-the-same-time, team mate to back you up???


I don't think that this format would work well at all with team games so I can understand why you wouldn't want to play it but that doesn't mean it couldn't be a interesting format for single games.

What the f*ck? That's not at all what I meant. I wasn't talking about team games, I agree with you, I really don't think it will work. I meant that when you get "fucked over" you just have to wait until the next round to fix it. It would be interesting and different, not necessarily bad.

[Environmentalist]

*edit* OK, then. I guess my suspicion was correct. This should really revolutionize how games are played around here.

SAME TIME

As everyone here knows, a single turn consists of 3 phases

• Deployment Phase
• Attack Phase
• Fortification Phase

Players conduct each of the 3 phases at the Same Time

• Deployment Phase - Players turn in cards and/or deploy units. Only after all players have done so will the actions of the players be revealed on the map and the next phase commence.
  
• Attack Phase - Players select where and with how many units they want to attack. Only after all players have done so will the actions of the players be revealed on the map and the next phase commence. See below for details on this phase.
  
• Fortification Phase - Players fortify their territories. Only after all players have done so will the actions of the players be revealed on the map and the next phase commence.

Attack Phase in Detail

• Players 'give orders', specifying from which territories they want to attack and with how many units.
• Units in a territory may be divided and assigned to attack in multiple directions.
• After all players have set up their attacks, their orders are revealed and the dice rolling is done automatically.
• For each attack, dice will roll until either the attacker runs out of units or they win the battle, in which case all remaining units move automatically into the new territory.
• There will be Border Clashes when 2 players attack each other. The winner will proceed to attack the remaining forces that were left behind by the loser. (see additional details below)
• There will be Territorial Disputes when 2 or more players attack the same neutral or 3rd party territory, assuming their combined forces successfully eliminate all units in that territory. (see additional details below)
• Attacks would be restricted to neighboring territories only, with the exception of a Surge Attack. This is an option for a player to specify that some or all of the units left over from an initial attack should proceed to attack an additional territory, for better or worse. Sometimes SA's result in BC's or TD's.

Order of the Attacks

1. Border Clashes
2. Normal Attacks
3. Territorial Disputes
4. Surge Attacks

Additional Details

• BC's and TD's are unique in that battles are between 2 attackers, thus there is no defender. There is thus no winner in the case of ties. Dice are rerolled to determine a winner.
• The fortification phase could be excluded entirely, or coupled together with the deployment phase. This would reduce playing time by a third, but it would also restrict the game dynamic.
• SA's could be optional. I suggest allowing one per turn for the dynamic it creates. But any more would begin to undermine the whole.

Some Benefits

• It would take a maximum of 3 days to complete one game turn, regardless of the number of players, as opposed to one day per player as in a sequential game.
• The playing field is equalized, so the order in which players login does not matter.
• If a player misses a day, they do not lose a whole turn.
• Strategy has a whole new meaning under this style of gameplay.
• Attacks would be restricted to neighboring territories only.
• There is no playing order, nor the issues inherent therein. Thus it is preferable to both freestyle and sequential styles, focusing the game on strategy, where it belongs.
• This space reserved for whatever I forgot to mention.
  

[drake_259]

what do you mean everyone would take turns too attack,


if that is the reason and it has been suggested before it probably was declined because turns would take too long

[FabledIntegral]

I don't understand the concept of "same time" but not freestyle. Care to elaborate?

[BaldAdonis]

If you mean "Play at the same time, and finish a game in one sitting" (like you would traditionally play), as opposed to "24 hours for each turn", then yes, this setting does already exist.

If you mean something in the vein of "Each player makes one move, then play passes" (like the way you would traditionally deploy armies), then that has been rejected (or at least dismissed) for taking too long.

If you'd like to elaborate, I'm sure that would help.

[Environmentalist]

well, being new, i don't have a good idea how long a sequential game would take. i imagine the longest it could take is 1 day per person per turn? in other words, a game of 8 players could take 8 days max to complete one turn? my idea would take 3 days max to complete a turn, no matter how many are playing. the only concession would be that all dice rolling is done automatically.