1 vs 1 amries

in a 1 vs 1 game , the person starting first has a huge advantage because of strategic importance's..but even worse is that he can kill enough of the opponent to reduce his armies per turn.

i suggest that if you start wit 4 armies that it stays 4 armies... not allowing the person that begins to have a double advantage.

This has been discussed numerous times. First-person has a huge advantage, could even have bonus, etc. Honestly, this can even happen in larger games where everyone is starting with the same, but the first few attack the last and they are DOA.

Personally, this is one reason why I never play 1v1

so make the rule s that if you start with 4  you get 4 for the whole game. not allowing for the person who goes first to not only get a strategic advantage but also reducing your number of armies before you even get one play

This sounds like a coding nightmare. If you don't like the luck factor, you should probably avoid 2 player games.

I will say though that my favorite 2 player game map is Brecourt Manor https://dominating12.com/maps#

There are no region bonuses so there are not the same issues with the starting bonus.

what if! - (consecutive games only.)

you got more points for winning from going 2nd. lesser than usual for going 1st and winning.

1v1 games are popular enough to consider this.

some math wizard could come up with suitable points ratio.

Oh.....I like this idea! 

on second thought...there are other ways to make 1v1 games more equitable....

Option 1...the first player can just reinforce only and fortify...no attack on the first turn.
Option 2...the first player can just receive half the amount of reinforcements only on the first turn.

Both of these options do very, very well (as seen on other sites I have been on and experienced) and they have stats to show that it does equal the playing field. I would prefer that over a point adjustment.

there have been lots of suggestions. i don't particularly like the one i just suggested the most.
the best one i remember being suggested, is where a 1v1 game can be replayed with opposite drop for the next game. same opponent.
basically it's two games tho

dang it peri, why did you have to use that nasty "e" word.

first issue needs resolving is the fact people can have bonus commands at the start of a game.

as for making 1v1 more equitable.
forget about it. people whine no matter what.
for those who play 1v1, they realize the skill is in winning while even going 2nd.

as for any data coming from MC, the initial results i saw were inconclusive. i think a good portion of the games were played by s single individual. so it is the results of his play more than results of the community. and for deploy only no attack, i have seen it used to strengthen first turn advantage on smaller maps.

war isnt fair
life isnt fair
risk isnt fair

get over it and play, dont like the format? play a different one.

Lol....I love it...that's why I like playing with you blueb  always need a guy for a counter point....blueb the man!

Yup I do agree....no bonuses on the drop would definitely help ALOT.  Yes, you are quite right about the deploy only method on smaller maps.  Yup...also agree if you don't like, or can't take the heat, don't play.