Capitals Games

I don't know about you guys but I have been in many capitals games where all the players build up their caps to the point where not even a double turn in of cards is enough to kill them. The game just goes on and on.

How bout an option to set the max number of troops you can have on your capital? That would force players to do something more productive with their troops like actually take regions or weaken other capitals.

I think that this would be a good idea as soon as we get the capped cards option. If we had this option beforehand and played a normal increasing card game it would be soley left up to whoever gets to a certain turn in amount first in most cases.

I agree with Vexer. It's an interesting option.
Most of capitals games are based on bank up troops in the capital, waiting the good moment for a multiple kill. Then the game often end in one turn.

I think the limitation should be set not just for the capital territories but for every territory on the map. It really forces the players to find out new strategies.
I guess it can works also in a deathmatch game as an option in the large, not just for capitals game.

I would love to try it.

Wow! Then Vexer would have problems winning death-matches!

Just make it a game option.

im with thorpe on this one
i find a square wheel makes for a bumpy ride so i would stick with the ol round wheel
make it an option for those that want the bumps

I like the idea of making it an option that can be used with any game type and having it apply to all territories on the map.

Good ideas guys.

Some kinks to be worked out though. What if someone sets the maximum troops per territory to 20 and you max out all your territories. Does this mean you can't place anymore? Do you get to defer the troops you couldn't place until your next turn or do you just lose them? I supposed a wise player would be sure to take extra territories when they come close to the limit but then other players might take them back to prevent you from having a place to place.

I suppose it will need some beta testing.

Ops, I had not got this problem... Well, my idea is to lose the troops when you can't place them.

This option can change a lot the way to play capitals and the way to end deathmatch, giving more importance to the territories owned. I like that, I think... more options, more fun!

Good idea General

Well, no such interest... I think people are afraid by new game options. Not me, I like that.

I thought another version really. How about to play with blocked capitals? You can move troops from or to your capital but you can't use them for make an attack... Capitals can't attack.

I think the common capitals game can be very interesting and very funny (not always really, sometimes it can be obvious and boring) but it is mainly based on the paths. Since often the setup is unfair because one player can have many free paths and one other can start with no paths. This is the reason why this idea came up in my mind. All the players have a blocked capital, more fair. I can't see exactly what result we can have in game-play.

Well, another important problem. I have seen many maps which have an unfair capital placement!
Give me the possibility to see the capitals before the game starts please.

I think you have to reset most of the maps. It's a big job! Possibly the caps should have the same numbers of paths, the same distance each other and the same control on the regions. The better solution for me is to place the capitals in the middle of the regions, if it is not possible then put the caps on the frontier territories. If there is no solution, don't allow that number of capitals in that map. If there are more than one solution, allow all and let the program to make a random seleksion: it's more funny whether the capitals are not always the same in the same map.

And one more thing. I can't see the reason why I can set Caribbean map to 8 capitals (wow!) and I can't set any map to 9 caps?

Two suggestion by me:
- Dominican Republic 4 caps: Santiago Rodriguez; Hermanas Mirabal; Santo Domingo; Barahona.
- Tor 5 caps: Northern Schataria; Fridigia; Shajera; Southern Arlas; The Kingdom of sun.

The cap placements is in the guide on how to make maps, we try not to put caps on the borders of territories, sometimes you just can not help it. 
If you feel a cap placement is wrong...please post it the new placement idea under that maps' topic so the mapmaker can change it. It also brings attention to the problem so more "eyes" will look at it.

I like both of your ideas...but the blocked caps option would make a long game! I love it!

I have a new idea that may be even better than limiting the amount of troops on territories.

Now keep in mind the goal here is to make sure that increasing games do not become never ending games or games that require someone to do something really stupid in order for someone to win. I am talking about games where the card turn in goes up over 70 or so. When players have more troops than two cards turn ins worth how do you kill them?

So my idea is that you get a bonus card for killing a player. This could be for fixed or increasing, capitals or deathmatch. It would be an additional game option.

I think that this would significantly decrease the likelihood of a never ending game. For example if you have 3 cards and you kill a player who has 3 cards you will have 7 cards which means most likely a double turn in which you could then use to kill a strong player with 5 cards and double turn in again.

One thing to think about is that this makes it a lot easier to walk the board in an increasing card game which is a great thing if you know how to do it, but for new player or players who only understand a continents strategy they may not want to play with this option.

I just came up with this and haven't thought in depth on it. Someone else want to do some in depth thinking for me?

I posted two things at the same time. Please read the above post. It's the important one.

@The_Bishop, thanks for volunteering to help out with capitals positions for every new map we make. Next up is San Francisco. I do believe it needs caps.

The reason why you can't play 9 player caps is that we already had like 20 maps before 9 player games became a possibility and I didn't have time to go back and create 9p cap positions for all those maps. I didn't really want to either because we had a hard time on most maps figuring out where to place 8. Take a look at 8p for Saturn and tell me where are we going to fit a 9th cap?

@Vexer - Of course! Who adjust capitals position on the older maps? That's crazy.
My suggestion is stop to paint new maps, we have many! And start work on the game! Adjust capitals, refine setup, change the timer, add utility buttons, work on new game options and put sounds! Game is very gloomy with no sounds.

I agree and disagree with you on the same time, Bishop. I agree that there is a lot of functionality to add. The point is: there are way more people that can make maps than people that can access and write new code to make the new functionality. Map makers are not the same people as the programmers.

I know this goes a bit off topic, but I would like to make my point. Programming is not something that works like "ask it and we make it". None of the current programmers is very used to the framework, as nobody worked on actually setting up the systems. The programming team is trying to add things as fast as they can, but it is not as simple as it may seem.

The community however could help by finding problems in maps and proposing fixes, because changes to maps are quite easy to make.

I agree and disagree at the same time too, Cireon. I know the map makers can't be programmers and I know how long is the program work.

Thanks for your work Vexer and my apologizes for had been so nervous. Now I try to explain why you made me nervous and what is crazy for me.

How is it possible that everybody in this site considers shadings and textures more important than capitals placement? The purpose of the maps is to play Risk on them! They are not paintings to watch!

People think so because the chief administrator of the site thinks so and they have trust in him. Since I have to change Vexer's mind if I want to change the mind-set of the site.

For you a map is ready to play when colors and textures are ok and you say that capitals are not a critical problem since we can adjust them later. Well, for me it's the contrary: a map is ready to play when the capitals are ok and we can adjust the textures later! Who is right? You or me?

I will be ultra satisfied if you will say that the reason is in the middle.

the bishop you are relatively new here so you haven't seen all of what has been done.

We have posted capital placements long before a map was activated and no one would comment on them. We discovered that by letting players play with the caps we choose we could then get them to comment. This is why I say we can always fix them later. It is impossible to come up with the best capitals placement before you've played the map. It impossible to see everything about a map before you've ever played it. There will always be a need for adjustments. This is why we beta test our maps. It's part of the process. We didn't just make up this process. this process comes from experience.

You make it sound like most of the capital positions are wrong. I personally chose the capital positions on most of the earlier maps after careful consideration. I challenge you to come up with better ones. But be prepared to explain why they are better. You can find the capital positions for many of the maps in their forum post. If you can't find them then I can pull them from the database for you. Just ask which map you want them for.

Glanru and I spent the most time on the caps for the world map. We made tables and did calculations to ensure that the positions were balanced. If you can come up with anything better for the world map, I would be stunned.