Bounty for killing the last territory (added poll)

[necrocat219]

This is a concept that is already present in online risk. I often find that even though there are weaker players that have no chance of winning, whoever attacks them first is often in a position to lose if they choose to do so. I think adding some sort of bounty upon finishing another player off would give incentive to finish a player off would add an interesting and rewarding-feeling to the game.

Another side effect would be that it would cancel out players who were trolled earlygame in conquest style attrition matches whereby a player decides to spawn adjacent to another player.

Possible bounties?:
- Replenishment of +3, +4 or +5 set amount
- Have the final capture point worth 3 territories until another player captures it
- +1 attack and defence boost

Also you could design a new race based on it, heres an example:

Scavangers (Vultures):

-When finishing off an opponent, that territory gets replenished to 8 men

Thoughts?

[Ozserf]

EFFACÉ

[necrocat219]

omg I said yes, but that should ONLY be optional in my opinion

Thanks, I'll add that to the OP

And weather you say yes or no, could you please leave constructive critisizm or at least point out whats wrong with it my idea? so far everyone that has said no has not left a reply.

[Autumnwolf17]

I agree, I'd say it should be an xp or rating or shard thing though. Not something that would affect the game itself. At least not that much.

[Ratburntro44]

This would just mess up the strategy. If someone who is doing badly gets themself in a position like that, all the better to them. Strategy shouldn't be interfered wit like this.

[AxemBlue]

I think this is actually a great idea. It adds a bit more strategy, balances some nagging issues and would hopefully discourage players from keeping pets, which I hate, especially when allies are involved.

[Ozserf]

EFFACÉ

[Ratburntro44]

This would just mess up the strategy. If someone who is doing badly gets themself in a position like that, all the better to them. Strategy shouldn't be interfered wit like this.

Yes, the strategy would be very different. That's why it should be optional, bounty playing can be fun.

I don't think a billion options in game creation would really help gameplay. Generally, more simple, shorter games like this don't benefit from adding a billion menu options that annoy people and delay game creation.

[Ozserf]

EFFACÉ

[Froggy618157725]

It messes up ranking. Now a person who should've gotten last may get 3rd or so, since they might get kept around for a unit boost until later.