Are you looking for a way to make multi-attack and local deployment games fun and tactical?

I've outlined a very simple rules change in this suggested feature:

https://warlight.uservoice.com/forums/77051-warlight-features/suggestions/7328093-deployment-limits-a-tactical-option-esp-for-mul

I've tested this in over 50 games, and it works really well. If you like the idea, please comment and vote!

+

-

++

got 3 votes from me

Thanks, gentlemen!

This simple fix, which destroys any kind of "plop down all your armies and attack immediately" strategy, makes for varied and interesting gameplay, much like local deployment (although it doesn't get tedious on large maps to the same extent, which is an added bonus).

And it's very simple; should be easy to implement.

for large maps on end of game each turn will take heaploads of time.

True.

I wouldn't use this setting on a really large map, or increase the value of the limit according to the map size.

It's still many times faster than local deployment, however.

For example, if your income is 140, you can deploy to 14 territories. That takes a while, but hardly an eternity - similar to a typical game.

As another example, in a game where you expect to be deploying several hundred armies per turn, set the limit to 20 or 25.

With a limit of 20, deploying 240 armies is still only 12 orders.

Edited 3/27/2015 20:10:50

Good idea, thanks for making a uservoice. I've voted for it.

Similar to the game I used to play before I found Warlight, VortexWars. The limit there was set at 8. Except you could have no more than 8 armies in a territory, total.

http://armorgames.com/play/13666/vortex-wars-2

When I was fooling around with different options which would make multi-attack games more interesting and balanced, I thought about having a territory limit.

Unfortunately, that doesn't work with the way deployments work, and would create weird stalemate situations. I find a deployment limit much more interesting, and allows for a variety of strategy.

For example, there is now an advantage to surrounding your enemy (whereas in regular Warlight, *being* surrounded is generally to your advantage, since your opponent now has to guess where you're going to attack). With a deployment limit, though, having more territories bordering your opponent is actually an advantage (like flanking your enemy in battle).

Dude, it's a good idea.

Thanks! Please vote for it if you can - it's one that could actually get implemented pretty quickly (as opposed to requests like "better AI!" or "Negotiable Peace Treaties!").

For whatever the newbie's opinion is worth, this is a really good idea, for these 2 reasons chiefly:

For example, there is now an advantage to surrounding your enemy (whereas in regular Warlight, *being* surrounded is generally to your advantage, since your opponent now has to guess where you're going to attack). With a deployment limit, though, having more territories bordering your opponent is actually an advantage (like flanking your enemy in battle).

it's one that could actually get implemented pretty quickly (as opposed to requests like "better AI!" or "Negotiable Peace Treaties!").

I always found Warlight to be too chaotic and unpredictable, and too... unadhering to the laws of warfare and logistics. This is a very simple addition that would go a long way towards alleviating those issues and therefore allowing conventional tactical maneuvres such as flanking, not only increasing realism and believability in the game, but also tactics and fun. +3 (+10 if I could)

P.S: Can I suggest linking the forum thread here on that uservoice page?

Edited 3/29/2015 05:41:12

Not a bad idea, thanks!

This rule has other interesting side-effects:

For example, it matters now what proportion of a bonus you control.

If your opponent has a 6-territory bonus, and you'd like to break it, in regular Warlight you'll want to make a big stack and just invade one of the territories. That's the most efficient way, and the hardest attack for the opponent to counter (or to recapture).

With a deployment limit, you'll need to capture more of the bonus (to be able to out-deploy your opponent), and ultimately capture more than half of it if you want to take it over on the following turn(s). If you take four out of six territories on an island, for example, you'll have a better shot at capturing the bonus on the next turn than if you just captured one or two.

Yeah, because as stated (or at least alluded to) earlier, logistics and surface area matter. Like in real life. Flanking = surface area.

A better implementation of Local Deployment.

Thanks, FoolOfATook!

You're quite right that this rule is a different implementation of local deployment.

As I see it, its main advantages over local deployment are:

* You're never forced to deploy armies on the other side of the map (which will most likely never see action); all your deployments can happen reasonably close to your borders (and, usually, along them). So the late game should be less tedious, or wrap up more quickly.

You don't get that local deployment effect where two players are fighting for turns and turns because they haven't realized that one of them produces three times as much as the other.

* Expanding into new territory is not quite as slow as with local deployments. You're still limited, particularly if you have few starting positions (i.e. you can expand into a new area faster if you already control several territories there), but you don't have to sit and wait for armies to arrive from a distant bonus.

* It's customizable, which is what I see as the main benefit:

Want a slower, more local-deployment-like game? Set a low limit, like 3-5 armies per territory.

This will give you the feeling of a slow local deployment game: you have to carefully gather armies and plan well ahead as they move around the map along "supply lines".

Want a faster, more dynamic game? Set a higher limit, like 10-50 armies per territory.

This will have some of the features of a local deployment game, but move much faster. You can't deploy all your armies in one stack (unless you're a small country), but you can still concentrate your armies very quickly and move fast.

That creates a setting somewhere in between regular Warlight and a Local Deployment game.

Edited 3/31/2015 15:39:59

Another potential advantage of this house rule is that, unlike local deployment, it can be used with maps that have overlapping bonuses. Most of my favourite maps have overlapping bonuses, and not being able to play on those maps is a severe restriction!

With this setting, any map will work, however. (And, as mentioned, it can be scaled to be appropriate to the map's size - something local deployments do not do well at all.)

You can play LD on any map, including those with overlapping bonuses. However all overlapping bonuses has to be set to 0. (for some map that is basically unplayable through.)

I really hope Deployment Limits comes to Warligth :)