[–] MightoScrub 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago
I think a territorial Go style game makes the most sense. It is, in essence a fight for territory. The openness of my plays in Go make for a "diverse" number of plays. While the diversity can lead to a players ruin. But with understanding patterns and some history of the game play becomes a bit more linear, and refined.
So while diversity is great and all, it really can cause a complete and utter loss in just the opening moves.
Kind of like reality.
[–] AnotherGalaxy [S] ago
Go is a great game and a good point to start.
We can add several different colors for the pieces in order to represent different nations. But this means that we have to play by completely different rules.
[–] Tallest_Skil 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago
Nationalist side gets a bunch of identical units that are weak alone but gain large power buffs when in proximity to one other. Have a couple different options for those, but the player only gets one kind to play with each game.
Globalist side gets a miasma of all the other groups of units (so no proximity buffs) and a tiny number of superpowered units. The latter, as one of their powers, can go behind enemy lines. The presence of the superpowered units in a region allows them to move their lesser units into that region. You could manage the superpower units as being “hidden” using a mechanic like Stratego’s. If you’re making a game that isn’t digital, you could have a grossly simplified format of “laws” whereupon the superpower units being in a region allow them to slowly revoke the unity powers of the opponent’s units in that region.
Seems pretty easy to make. It’ll never be published, though.
[–] AnotherGalaxy [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I think your answer might be the best one so far. If we can combine this with the metrics suggested above by @progressbin and the territorial properties of Go, we might be on the right track of solving this problem.
There are plenty of details, however, that need to be worked out, and a video simulation could help us a lot to understand the strategy better.
[–] zxcvzxcv 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
Don't forget to include a nigger nation. it would have separate victory conditions. if the niggers can rape/replace all of the white nations, then the niggers win. The down-side to playing as the niggers is that you aren't ever allowed to build anything. You can only destroy stuff built by the white nations.
[–] SearchVoatBot 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
This submission was linked from this v/whatever submission by @progressbin.
Posted automatically (#60690) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@AnotherGalaxy: Click here to suppress your crosslink notifications from @progressbin)
[–] totallynotFBI ago
Risk meets Monopoly
[–] AnotherGalaxy [S] ago
I had a look at the Risk game and I find it a bit boring. The game is too long, and the ratio of educative vs time is just too big.
But I agree with including Monopoly in a combination with others games, such as, chess, Go, Mahjong, Rummy, and cards.