Do or Die!

by **DoomYoshi** on Tue Apr 10, 2012 9:12 pm

Concise description:

Only Autoattacks are allowed - no attack button

Specifics/Details:

This is actually a setting that has been tried before. I used to play with this in the original DOS RISK game.
Would be a setting under 'Special Gameplay'
I am pretty giddy about trench finally getting through, so I am hoping to bring this idea to the forefront - it was probably suggested before
probably much easier to code than adjacent (mafia forum doesn't have delete buttons, so getting rid of an attack button is, I imagine, similar in difficulty)

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

An amazing setting; will make flat rate and nuclear games stall less (hopefully)

by **chapcrap** on Tue Apr 10, 2012 10:39 pm

Wait, there is a normal assault button?

by **Criticalwinner** on Thu Apr 12, 2012 10:04 am

DoomYoshi wrote:An amazing setting; will make flat rate and nuclear games stall less (hopefully)

Or this is what happens:
I have 13 armies, my opponent has 5... But I won't attack because I lose the game if I don't win.
Next turn: 16 to 8.... Too close to call....

See the pattern?

by **DoomYoshi** on Thu Apr 12, 2012 10:46 am

Maybe. Anyways, stalling isn't the main reason. The main reason is that its a good setting with a classic name. I haven't played that version of RISK probably since 2000. Yet I still remember the setting fondly (although that auto attack brought you right down to 1 troop instead of 3

by **Criticalwinner** on Thu Apr 12, 2012 10:58 am

Yes, nostalgia can be a powerful detterant. I'm always in favor of new and different ways to play, but I'm not in favor of anything that can make more people complain about dice.

by **maxfaraday** on Thu Apr 12, 2012 11:44 am

Good Idea.

Would be very useful in these assdoodle/lux 1min speed games.

by **Criticalwinner** on Fri Apr 13, 2012 11:37 am

maxfaraday wrote:Good Idea.

Would be very useful in these assdoodle/lux 1min speed games.

"Assdoodle"? Those are the only speed games I can play during classes...

But I lose almost all of them anyways.

by **DoomYoshi** on Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:37 am

Bump! Look at Me!

by **Dukasaur** on Fri Sep 27, 2013 7:22 pm

Yeah, I think this would be a great option for people who like round limits, but hate spending the second half of the game stacking.

by **JamesKer1** on Sun Sep 29, 2013 7:55 pm

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=471&t=4524

Came across this today.

by **Dukasaur** on Sun Sep 29, 2013 8:44 pm

JamesKer1 wrote:http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=471&t=4524

Came across this today.

Fee fie fo fum!
I smell a Merge on the hori-zun!

by **agentcom** on Sun Sep 29, 2013 8:52 pm

Dukasaur wrote:
JamesKer1 wrote:http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=471&t=4524

Came across this today.

Fee fie fo fum!
I smell a Merge on the hori-zun!

Haha, no that has to do with the creation of the auto assault button. I sent it over to Implemented

by **Dukasaur** on Fri May 30, 2014 6:29 pm

Since there's a new sheriff in Suggstown, it's time to bump one of my favourite suggestions.

by **Metsfanmax** on Fri May 30, 2014 7:37 pm

Dukasaur wrote:Since there's a new sheriff in Suggstown, it's time to bump one of my favourite suggestions.

I would probably have submitted this if I had known about it...

by **IcePack** on Fri May 30, 2014 8:24 pm

Why not just set up with players who want auto only?

by **Gweeedo** on Fri May 30, 2014 11:03 pm

Great idea!

Being that I only use the auto assault button anyhow.
Maybe having a card/cards (when turned in) trigger that (specified) region too auto assault (a bit more tactical maybe or another spoil option).

by **Dukasaur** on Sat May 31, 2014 1:15 pm

IcePack wrote:Why not just set up with players who want auto only?

Because there's no way to enforce it, and making an unenforceable rule is worse than no rules at all.

Besides, the sense of excitement would be lost if you knew that you could always change your mind. If you've never played the DOS version of Risk you probably won't understand, but it was a much more exciting game knowing that there was no turning back from an attack.

by **Foxglove** on Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:44 pm

Dukasaur wrote:Since there's a new sheriff in Suggstown, it's time to bump one of my favourite suggestions.

haha

This is interesting!

So would it require auto-attacking all the way down to 1? What if it went down to the normal auto-attack limits and a user ended up with 3 troops against 2? Could they attack again? I guess this setting would certainly remove a lot of strategy, because you would no longer be able to tap stacks.

by **iAmCaffeine** on Wed Jun 04, 2014 4:45 am

No thanks. I don't see how this really adds to the strategy of the game.

by **Donelladan** on Wed Jun 04, 2014 4:48 am

It is supposed to add to the fun of the game, not the strategy

Yes, do it !

by **iAmCaffeine** on Wed Jun 04, 2014 4:49 am

Donelladan wrote:It is supposed to add to the fun of the game, not the strategy

Yes, do it !

Is this not a strategy game? In recent times we've had a great increase on settings options, perhaps on the border of too many. I think if more are going to be added then they should actually bring something constructive to the game.

by **Gweeedo** on Wed Jun 04, 2014 11:07 pm

iAmCaffeine wrote:
Donelladan wrote:It is supposed to add to the fun of the game, not the strategy

Yes, do it !

Is this not a strategy game? In recent times we've had a great increase on settings options, perhaps on the border of too many. I think if more are going to be added then they should actually bring something constructive to the game.

This is a game of Skill and daring...skill and daring!

This would be awesome...DO it.

I have spoken!

by **IcePack** on Fri Jun 06, 2014 4:06 pm

Vote -1

by **Kevi** on Wed Aug 26, 2015 10:51 am

In many multiplayer games when surrounded by different opponents there would be no option to reduce an opponents stack and this would seriously detract from the strategy if it were compulsory. This would make it a totally different game. Vote -1

by **Dukasaur** on Wed Aug 26, 2015 11:19 am

Kevi wrote:In many multiplayer games when surrounded by different opponents there would be no option to reduce an opponents stack and this would seriously detract from the strategy if it were compulsory. This would make it a totally different game. Vote -1

Yeah, it would make it a totally different game.

A much more exciting game.

And it doesn't become less strategic, just strategic in a different sense. Just like in real life, once you punch somebody in the nose you can't take it back, so you have to be very, very certain that's what you really want to do.

This is the default option in the DOS-based version of Risk. Don't know if it is in the Windows version, but you might check it out. It makes for a very fast-paced and exciting game. Probably not something you would ever play in a clan war, but when you were playing for fun I think you would enjoy it.

Just try it before you knock it. I'm sure the DOS version of Risk is available as abandonware by now, you should be able to find a copy and try it.

Do or Die!

Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Re: Do or Die!

Who is online