Conquer Club

Do you think this is true? I think it is because i just played a game and a guy missed a turn and got a 32 army bonus thats the only reason he won UNFAIR

It depends on which map...On maps with auto deploy its a disadvantage to miss a turn.

Even if there's auto deploy its still unfair

Sure they get "twice as many armies." But really, you should have destroyed twice as much of them in the meantime. Its like their armies were deployed on the turn they missed, but you just ignored them, and allowed them to grow even more, so they could wipe you out. If those extra 16 armies really made all the difference, then he should have been wiped out on the round he missed.

Missing turns and collecting a deferred bonus doesn't win games,
but other players ignoring them does.

Had someone broken the bonus then they would not have gotten the full 32 armies, they would have lost 2 for every army bonus that was broken. When someone misses a turn, go for their biggest bonus.

If you miss a turn on the magic map and Sirius, dui or battle rage is playing ...you lose...Nothing unfair about it.

The main thing is that those are all armies that he would have gotten anyway. The only thing that has changed is that you now have 2 turns in a row to attack without him defending himself.

i said that it could be seen as unfair but the rule should stay. there are those who abuse it but as stated previously you should take advantage of that. I feel the rule should stay b/c it has been amended to a point that it is not to hard to overcome for the other players and there are some instances where said player honestly can't make it back to the game in time. With my work schedule i have many times in the last few weeks been worried about missing turns.

sgo220 wrote:Do you think this is true? I think it is because i just played a game and a guy missed a turn and got a 32 army bonus thats the only reason he won UNFAIR

in fact, if he wouldn't have missed that turn(s) he would still get those armies, just earlier. most people waste their armies, but he could have saved them up and use them 2 turns later, without having to wait to use them, or he could 'use' the armies to get an even bigger area, or defend the territories he already owns, and then save them up, while defending himself. either way, all the armies he got that turn were armies he ALREADY DISERVED.

the real reason why he won is:

BECAUSE YOU ARE TOO FUCKING STUPID TO BREAK HIS BONUS WHILE HE WAS MISSING HIS TURNS, RETARD.

32 armies over 2 turns means he had 16 armies a turn, so a bonus of 13 armies either from continents or holding an X amount of territories, either way you should have broken or lower his bonus. you didn't and that's what lost you the game. missing turns is a DISADVANTAGE, stupidity is an even bigger disadvantage tho.

Your poll is missing a choice:

Don't be a putz, anyone bitching about this rule has only himself to blame

You KNOW they missed a turn, so you know they will be getting double armies. That makes it your priority to 1) break their bonuses so the doubling is less and missing the turn costs them more, and 2) to defend--if you can--against the doubled armies.

edit: you know what? I was too nice.

YOU IDIOT. You already got your armies doubled. You took a turn, you took another turn, you got your second batch of armies BEFORE he did. It's not anyone else's fault that you mindlessly played your turn as if nothing was out of the ordinary and allowed him to do serious damage in the next turn. If you were playing with cards you also got two cards to his one.

Missing a turn is NEVER a good thing unless your opponent doesn't account for it--which is what the OP failed to do.

Yeah if you are talking about a particular game where you let an op keep a bonus for 2 turns...More fool you

Having to assume that someone who missed a turn plans a surprise attack is outrageous and even less sympathetic (if they couldn't help it) than a slight disincentive that makes deliberate missing of turns less likely and reassures the other players. Something like docking 20% (rounded up) of the troops from the missed turn. Letting people hold up the game and then double up reinforcements based on a sly calculation isn't really fair. I don't recall being really screwed by this but the response that no-one likes a whiner wears a bit thin.

The Wall wrote:Having to assume that someone who missed a turn plans a surprise attack is outrageous and even less sympathetic (if they couldn't help it) than a slight disincentive that makes deliberate missing of turns less likely and reassures the other players. Something like docking 20% (rounded up) of the troops from the missed turn. Letting people hold up the game and then double up reinforcements based on a sly calculation isn't really fair. I don't recall being really screwed by this but the response that no-one likes a whiner wears a bit thin.

You don't have to assume that they plan a surprise attack. You should assume, however, that they're still getting armies despite the fact that they missed a turn, and therefore are worth attacking. There is no doubling-up of armies; you're getting no more than the armies you would have gotten, with the added disadvantage of having to wait for them until after your opponents have destroyed you. If your opponents haven't taken advantage of the missed turn, then its just bad strategy on their part.

The thing is, people have a tendency to ignore people who just missed a turn. They see that they haven't gotten any stronger, so they figure they're not a threat. What might help people who have this problem: pretend that the armies they just missed actually were added to their territories--but can't do any fighting. Destroy this opponent before those armies become active.

But you don't know where they would have put them - so someone who wasn't a threat and could have been ignored becomes a threat because they still have open options after the missed turn. My point is having to account for that when other players might present a more obvious threat can ruin strategy.

I think the rule is fine as is with 2 exceptions.
Dustbowl and maybe other maps, where you can skip turns to avoid decay, but hopefully this will be fixed.
Fog of war games, you can take a large bonus, skip a couple of turns, and it for several turns without anyone noticing.

You guys do realize that the new missed turn policy gives the make-up armies at the end of their turn, right? How exactly are they going to sneak attack with armies that they can't deploy until after they've ended their attack?

That was the fix to stop people from using missed turns as a tactic for doing just what you guys are freaking out about.

I invite anyone who wants 50 world 2.1 games to play me 1v1, who thinks they can miss a turn, and win the game to pm me, so I can set them up

occasionally it is possible to make it work, but sometimes its more of a coincidence that good dice accompanied the new turn then it is a direct result of the missed turn. With the settup now, the danger of missing a turn, far out weighs the possible benefit

I love when players miss turns. I beg someone to take me up on my offer...

AAFitz wrote:I invite anyone who wants 50 world 2.1 games to play me 1v1, who thinks they can miss a turn, and win the game to pm me, so I can set them up

occasionally it is possible to make it work, but sometimes its more of a coincidence that good dice accompanied the new turn then it is a direct result of the missed turn. With the settup now, the danger of missing a turn, far out weighs the possible benefit

I love when players miss turns. I beg someone to take me up on my offer...

Same here...Come and play me on any castle map..Magic,Might or Feudal and miss a turn.
any settings..1v1 or otherwise.

KoE_Sirius wrote:..Come and play me on any castle map..Magic,Might or Feudal

shh.. i hope your stalkers did not hear you Sirius!

Yeap the deferred armies mean it is no longer of any advantage to miss.
Bravo i say!

zimmah wrote:the real reason why he won is:

BECAUSE YOU ARE TOO FUCKING STUPID TO BREAK HIS BONUS WHILE HE WAS MISSING HIS TURNS, RETARD.

ahhhhh, i think i'm in love... so nice to have someone read my mind and just lay it out there in such a direct and honest way...-0

KoE_Sirius wrote:It depends on which map...On maps with auto deploy its a disadvantage to miss a turn.

Auto Deploy?? What maps have that?

even if you get the extra armies since they don't come in until after attack phase I don't think it's an advantage especially since as people have said you should have taken advantage of the absence by taking out a players bonuses. It's all part of the game. I have seen players win with the extra armies they receive, but I have also seen players lose. It's up to you to do the best for your game and taking players out.

Hemohomeboy

Nice bump...

Sometimes you have to try and decide whether the player is deadbeating out completely or may come back after two turns. In speed games this can be absolutely key, for there isn't much point attacking armies that are going to become neutrals. The two times I have been accused of cheating were when I guessed (correctly) that the player was just deadbeating. "You must have known!" they cried. "Secret Alliance" they declared, I have always felt in what must be whiny, girly voices. The fact that after 1 miss I immediately forted armies AWAY from the turn-misser and concentrated on the playing opposition compleley freaked them out. They simply couldn't accept that I would RISK so much on the chance of a win (or avoiding the dreaded stalemate).

So in speed games there could be an advantage in going off-line (many check this) for ten minutes and then zipping back on with a "Sorry connection problems!!!!" and cleaning up. I haven't tried it myself (yet), but would think it a completely valid strategy. I know that if I am playing against the guy now off-line, I am re-evaluating the odds, smarter more aware players do this. Turn it against them (or me) and you might well increase your chances of winning a tight 3 or 4 man flat rate/no cards battle.