When a board allows players to choose their initial starting territories, you cannot tell which territories are neutral and therefore cannot be selected.  You have to click on the territories to see, and then you have to know that because it did not change to your color that means it was neutral.

I think this will be confusing for players.  Instead, territories that start neutral should be shown as neutral during the territory selection phase.

It is annoying.  

Click.  "Why didn't that select".  Click again. "Oh, it must be neutral."

+1, and it got me thinking... What if there was a feature that allowed players to place a limited number of units on desired countries - and the rest would fill neutral?  

M57 wrote:

+1, and it got me thinking... What if there was a feature that allowed players to place a limited number of units on desired countries - and the rest would fill neutral?  

I can't think of a particular use for that right now, but I'm sure if we had it, I'd use it eventually.

I was  also thinking that there are two kinds of neutrals - setup neutrals and random neutrals.  In theory, you could have the setup neutrals be shown during initial territory selection, but not the random ones.  Then after player rank their territories, during the assignment phase, the random neutrals are chosen, and assignment goes on as is.  It's not a big change, but I think it would make more sense to not know where the random neutrals are going to show up when you are doing your selection.  I don't really have a strong opinion either way though.

It is certainly part of the strategy (currently) to make your territory selections based on where the random neutrals are. I'm not sure if I would like it more with selecting the random neutrals after the player selection, or before like it is now.

If it stays the same, it would be easier to see where they are when making selections.

These are really interesting nuances that you all are discussing.

Korrun wrote:

It is certainly part of the strategy (currently) to make your territory selections based on where the random neutrals are. I'm not sure if I would like it more with selecting the random neutrals after the player selection, or before like it is now.

I was pondering this same thing.  I am thinking that it would be better to not know where the random neutrals are going to fall ahead of time.  

I'm really ambivalent.  I think allowing more chance for strategy is always good, but it just seems more natural to me for the random neutrals to be assigned after territory selection.

Either way, I really just want to see the territories I can't select be identified in some way during selection.

random neutrals are random and not known prior to game start, even with choose your own territories, right? random, to me, means players don't know where they are and would/should be implemented similar to what Ozy said in #4 -- choose territores, random select neutrals, assign territories based on choices. 

predetermined (by designer) neutrals -- i'm thinking Isles here -- are a P.I.T.A. to see and work around. I agree they should have some sort of highlight when in choose your own territory. 

NOTE: none of this really applies for random assignments... 

M57 wrote:

What if there was a feature that allowed players to place a limited number of units on desired countries - and the rest would fill neutral?  

now THAT's how you do random fill neutrals! i like it and can definitely see this being used. 

weathertop wrote:

M57 wrote:

What if there was a feature that allowed players to place a limited number of units on desired countries - and the rest would fill neutral?  

now THAT's how you do random fill neutrals! i like it and can definitely see this being used. 

I mean.. that's how you'd do it in RL, right?  The only down-side I can think of off the bat is the more inferior the board, the more the order of the 'best' territories would be known and so the process would always play out the similarly.  But even here, there would be jockeying for the tactical advantage of having adjacent territories, etc.

weathertop wrote:

random neutrals are random and not known prior to game start, even with choose your own territories, right? 

Wrong

Amidon37 wrote:

weathertop wrote:

random neutrals are random and not known prior to game start, even with choose your own territories, right? 

Wrong

well that's ... surprising. guess i'll have to try one and see. i rarely play any that require me to place my own. 

M57 wrote:

weathertop wrote:

M57 wrote:

What if there was a feature that allowed players to place a limited number of units on desired countries - and the rest would fill neutral?  

now THAT's how you do random fill neutrals! i like it and can definitely see this being used. 

I mean.. that's how you'd do it in RL, right?  The only down-side I can think of off the bat is the more inferior the board, the more the order of the 'best' territories would be known and so the process would always play out the similarly.  But even here, there would be jockeying for the tactical advantage of having adjacent territories, etc.

I disagree. The meta-game takes care of this. And in fact this is happening now, and does not depend on a board being at all 'inferior.' All it takes is for one area or continent to be slightly stronger than another and the process begins.

But given some number of rational players, the 'process playing out similarly' is only one possible though unlikely scenario. Take Isles of Kjeldor - I have an opinion about the strongest areas on that board. Let's posit that they exist, and that I'm right, and furthermore that everybody knows where they are. Is it in each player's best interest to select the territories in those areas first?

Let's posit that they exist, and that I'm right, and furthermore that everybody knows where they are. Is it in each player's best interest to select the territories in those areas first?

That question is all Game theory.  

weathertop wrote:

Amidon37 wrote:

weathertop wrote:

random neutrals are random and not known prior to game start, even with choose your own territories, right? 

Wrong

well that's ... surprising. guess i'll have to try one and see. i rarely play any that require me to place my own. 

I was on a Gearstorm kick for awhile.  Also in a Ancient Isles of Kjeldor tourney.  Both have territory selection and random neutrals.

ratsy wrote:

Let's posit that they exist, and that I'm right, and furthermore that everybody knows where they are. Is it in each player's best interest to select the territories in those areas first?

That question is all Game theory.  

 Like I just said I am playing in a an Ancient Isles tourney.  I may be wrong, but I am of the opinion that going for the islands initially is the superior strategy due to their small size and defense dice advantage.  My partner and I have tried a couple of different ways to "choose" them but it seems so it everyone else and we have been losing out.  This time we made a bid for the upper left (which is the "middle good" area to go for) and it is paying off.

And Hugh started one round with the 70 point continent on the right. Worked out pretty well for him.

Right. Without looking it up, I think my record on AIoK is decent, and the next time I put a top-25 pick on ANY island territory in that game will be the first time. Perhaps someday the meta will catch up and the islands will become the advantageous place to try to start, but we're not there yet - the clear best strategy right now is the level-one approach (I count level-zero).

Note to self: when playing against asm always choose the islands.