Why are there neut territories here?

[hammocksleeper]

Look at this game, http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=3610641

Game log, at time 2008-11-07 19:37:20

He attacks green, who is in china. but he doesn't conquer the territory, he just "annihilates" some of his armies, then somehow there are neutral armies on that same territory he was just attacking from green! this game started with 0 neutral territories, and there should never have been any. I wasn't there when this happened, can someone explain this weird thing? Or am I just being an idiot and forgetting something

[Kotaro]

It's called bombardment. In some games, it has this special feature, and it's just a way to destroy armies, not conquer territories, and leaves one neutral on the spot.

[Ditocoaf]

Yeah, when the map key says that you can "bombard" a territory, it means there's a one-way attack, but if you destroy it, it just gets turned into 1 neutral. It's like a border where you can attack, but not move armies.

[hecter]

Think of it like bombing a territory.

[hammocksleeper]

Yeah, when the map key says that you can "bombard" a territory, it means there's a one-way attack, but if you destroy it, it just gets turned into 1 neutral. It's like a border where you can attack, but not move armies.

whoa, that's weird. so you can bust their bonus there if they had one, but you can't actually conquer the territory yourself. so strange. what is the advantage of having this "bombardment" feature in the map as opposed to the artillery in D-Day where you can actually CONQUER the territory?

[owenshooter]

i think it's cool that hammock is playing new maps and seeing all the different types of features
in different games!!! see, there is a world beyond classic!!! anyway, i like the bombardment in pearl
harbor and WWII, especially.

[AAFitz]

Yeah, when the map key says that you can "bombard" a territory, it means there's a one-way attack, but if you destroy it, it just gets turned into 1 neutral. It's like a border where you can attack, but not move armies.

whoa, that's weird. so you can bust their bonus there if they had one, but you can't actually conquer the territory yourself. so strange. what is the advantage of having this "bombardment" feature in the map as opposed to the artillery in D-Day where you can actually CONQUER the territory?

the advantage is that you dont have to move in an army, so your attacking force can stay strong, even after killiing multiple targets...the dice not withstanding

its also so that you dont have too many options of attacking everyone all at once, and being able to move in

for starters

[owenshooter]

the advantage is that you dont have to move in an army, so your attacking force can stay strong, even after killiing multiple targets...the dice not withstanding

its also so that you dont have too many options of attacking everyone all at once, and being able to move in

for starters

i love in WWII, how you can just bombard people off of england, if you aren't given a spot to begin with on that potential
bonus. and i love how that bonus can eventually be neutralized, so nobody earns it, and the fight has to be won somewhere on the mainland...-0

[Ditocoaf]

Yeah, when the map key says that you can "bombard" a territory, it means there's a one-way attack, but if you destroy it, it just gets turned into 1 neutral. It's like a border where you can attack, but not move armies.

whoa, that's weird. so you can bust their bonus there if they had one, but you can't actually conquer the territory yourself. so strange. what is the advantage of having this "bombardment" feature in the map as opposed to the artillery in D-Day where you can actually CONQUER the territory?

There's no advantage to you, per-se, in terms of winning. But it's another feature that makes the map more interesting. It's like, there's a spot you can't get to quite yet, but you can still hurt your opponent from all the way across the map.

[sully800]

And map makers wanted this feature because its a more realistic why for artillery to work. If you bomb an enemy you aren't actually sending men across the country, you are just destroying their troops. It makes sense for troops to advance when attacking an adjacent territory. But long rage attacks make more sense as bombardment.

D-Day was created before bombardment was an XML option

[hammocksleeper]

Thanks for the answers guys.

So if what I'm hearing is correct, when you are bombarding another territory, you don't ever want to auto roll it, because even after you destroy all the player's armies, it will just keep rolling against the neut until you are down to 3 armies?

[Natewolfman]

Thanks for the answers guys.

So if what I'm hearing is correct, when you are bombarding another territory, you don't ever want to auto roll it, because even after you destroy all the player's armies, it will just keep rolling against the neut until you are down to 3 armies?

no, when you auto it stops as soon as you kill the tert, then after your done auto-rolling is when it resets to 1 basically

[Ditocoaf]

Thanks for the answers guys.

So if what I'm hearing is correct, when you are bombarding another territory, you don't ever want to auto roll it, because even after you destroy all the player's armies, it will just keep rolling against the neut until you are down to 3 armies?

When you destroy the last enemy army, turning the territory neutral, and it says you "annihilated" them, this will stop the auto-roll.

EDIT: bah, fastposted by nate