I love the Order Delay card but I think it's a tad bit too powerful. I was thinking of ways to make it less powerful and one way is to keep the functionality as it is now but instead of making it so you get last move(s) for sure (granted 1 is played), you would only get to delay after your opponent has made 2 sets of moves.

This may sound confusing but here is an example;

Player A is behind on card pieces and he knows he's going up against an Order Delay card the next turn. A majority of his turn is to just set up defenses to block the order delay and not attack. He is penalized even if he has a lot of armies to delay. I think the delay should take effect only to delay the 2 sets worth so Player B's orders kick in after Player A makes 4 successful orders (no transfer's of 0 and negated moves of course).

The number of sets until it kicks in could just be a feature the game creator can set. I think if a player has the armies to delay enough he should be able to 'use them' to offset their opponent's delay card.

This would put it more on the level of the Order priority card in which that card only gives you first move for your first order.

This feature is only really going to be used for the upper tier players because we are so meticulous with our orders and it then gives a slight advantage to the player without the card.

Nice work Ruthless. I'm reading it as food for thought since I too love the order delay card and don't think it needs fixing. I agree though that the card - used oppotunistically - can single handedly tips the scales of a match in your favor.(It is that powefull).

Just to shed another thought on the issue, and introduce an alternaitve way in which order delay cards could be used, I've thought for a long time now that the card would be more streamlined to the effects of the order priority card if, in cases where each opponent played an order delay card, that the winner would go to the fewest amount of delays.

For example, Ruthless and I each play a delay card yet he makes three moves after the delay and I only choose one. This would allow all his delayed moves to be made after my pre-delayed ones but my one move would still be made last. Morevoer, if he gambled and wanted to delay 8 moves and I did 6, his eight delays would go after all the intiial pre-delayed moves yetI would get all 6 of mine to go after his.

I think this would make for interesting cases where mulitple delays were wanted but out of fear that the opponent would gamble less, more often then not delayed moves would be only those that were deemed extremely necessary. In sum, it is just a minor tweak but enough to decrease the omnipotence of the card or reward the players who have more standing armies and thus can make more 1 transfers then there opponent.

Again, I like it as it is but am always open to tweaks and certainly always pro-discussion. Good thread Ruthless. I like what you said but 2 sequences seems arbitrary and I suspect it would largely just be helpful during the early stages of games.

How about just making the order delay card work only on the very last order?

It definitely could work, but it would have to be a new card to preserve existing games that already have the current card.

The only thing I don't like about it is that it makes army toggling more powerful, since army toggling can override delays. Army toggling is easier to do when you're bigger and have more armies abound, and one of WarLight's design goals was to make comebacks more feasible than other games where as soon as one player gets big they become unstoppable. Anything that benefits the big player more than the small one is counter to this goal.

Army toggling can also be a lot of work in the extreme case, where games on large maps have grown to large armies. If you can move one army from every territory to every possible territory in your empire it could take hours to enter your turn. While it's a valid strategy, another design goal of WarLight is to eliminate tedious tasks. I wouldn't want to do anything that makes this strategy more powerful simply because it's tedious - I don't want the player with more time having an edge over players who spend less time on the game.

|> How about just making the order delay card work only on the very last order?

I like this better, as it draws parallels to the priority card.

when i first read the original post, I was thinking what Fizzer already said..
the OP card that is proposed seems like it would be nearly useless, save in those close games where each side cis gaining near as many armies/turn, because then they could each equally delay within their territory \*which i presume is what army toggling refers to*

personally, i think that it needs no changing, albiet a card similar to crafty's suggestion could be implemented \*similar to the abandon/blockade similarity, one designed to be less OP*

I was thinking the same thing as you Randy when I was writing it, but my tweak was more for a Strategic 1v1 setting where armies are limited and you wouldn't come across that tedious task. There is also the element of multiple players doing the same thing, making tons of unnecessary orders.

on Crafty's question, that thought came to mind to make it even with the other card and that itself would reduce the power because you would have to choose only 1 order to make last move. Also, it would probably be much easier to implement. I just thought there would should be a little more complexity to it but after thinking about it more, the simpler the better.

Imp is the king of army toggling! All game every game! Toggler!

I do think I would prefer the OD card to work only on the last order, as I mentioned above... but I don't think I really want it to change if it would mean adding yet another card. Would it be possible to change all OD cards in existing games to be "Order Priority (Old)" cards? Then all new games could get the new OD card, which works only on the last order.

You guys should decide if you're talking about order **Priority** or **Delay**; I'm having difficulty following you.

Also, I think both cards are perfect now. And if anything, crafty's proposal seems somewhat more reasonable than the original (which would basically defeat the purpose of the card), the follow-up (games even more dependent on guessing? Seriously?). Ii also goes well with the philosophy of simplicity.

I agree. Crafty's limited Delay idea is superior to Ruthless's. If we were to have a limited delay card, it should be that it effects only 1 move (which, if you think about it, is how priority already works).