Hi I've been playing for a while now and am trying to create new scenarios with unorthodox rules to try to change things up. Mostly games where you don't have to kill the other team to win.
Here is what I have so far:

1. A quest game based on Zelda
https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?TemplateID=715259

2. Capture the flag
https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?TemplateID=545773

I've been having a hard time finding players who follow the rules or even interested so wondering what I can find in the forum

I am so very interested! Will have to look at those games...

*looks at games*

Meh can't see all the options - not high enough level. Be sure to Invite me to one :)

Edited 11/23/2015 00:19:44

in general, if you want to try out rules that are not directly supported by software, you should avoid open seats in your games. you can always try to advertise in the forums, though be careful of who you let in ofc. if you have some trustworthy acquaintances, those would be your best shot.

that being said, most of warlight is about destroying the opponents position, so you may want try and alter your rules a bit to accommodate this.

here are some suggestions on changes for your zelda template, to try to make it more practical in warlight terms, to give you some ideas to start with:

1. capture 10 temples = win.

^ my questions here are, what if I have 5 temples, and someone else has 4? what if I capture all 10, but never hold onto all of them at once? it will be hard to enforce these with open seats especially, since people are very unlikely to surrender because of a player made rule. you see plenty of rule breaking from open seat players in diplomacies, and this is without anyone asking them to honor someone else's apparent victory.

even with open seats, you could force everyone to play around the temples, if you gave them higher starting neutrals perhaps (not sure if this is possible), and/or, if you set the bonuses for the temples, to be very high in relation to the other bonuses, such that anyone who controls all the temples, or quite possibly a mere majority of them, would be able to force a win, making most others surrender.

2. use no reinforcement cards except when you eliminate a player.

^ to me, this would also be hard to prevent or enforce, except in more mature groups more interested in roleplay, i suspect. if the reinforcement card is primarily for the ai, why not just give the ai a starting spot with a ton of troops on it, instead? or, why have the ai at all? that adds in a bit of an element of luck, more so than normal. one player could legitimately be outplaying his nearby opponents but get focused on by the ai, while others happily gobble up territories where the ai killed neutrals.

Sounds interesting, I'm up for it.

I'd be interested in playing some games with more unique rules.

Sign me up, but I think these rules need a bit of refining.

Punching bag to answer some questions:

1. You don't have to hold all 10 temples at the same time. The intention is take a temple then leave it.

I made all the bonuses 0 or nearly 0 so there is no incentive to fight or capture territories. I also added an army cap. This way even if someone doesn't follow the rules they won't be able to deploy after using the card and the other players can retreat with minimum harm.

2. Good point, I'll see how players respect the cards. For now I like the AI as it adds some random to the game and a sidequest (beat the AI get a card and bonus temple)