I'm curious if anyone has tried this, so I can not put in the effort to test myself.

Assume there is a regular "world map", and then also one territory off map that is owned by each player so that factories can use this territory to place units for each player distinctly.

What are some ways to handle this:

#1) Capitals - make every territory on the 'world map' a capital. When players are eliminated from the world map, they lose all the capitals and are eliminated.

#2) Give off-map territory a max=1, and a self-factory of -1. Then every world territory has a +1 factory on the off-map territory (including the off-map territory as a member.) So the off-map territory keeps itself alive as long as you have at least one world territory. Once you lose all of those, the beginning of your next turn, the off-map territory suicides itself and you eliminate yourself.

Do those both work? Seems like #1 is the best. Any downsides I'm missing? Any other solutions?

#1 seems to be the easiest to implement, right? Factories can be fickle. I often use a test board to make sure my more complicated designs actually work. This is one I used as I was working on "Hunger Games." At this point it was working, but I have since simplified it a bit, eliminating the need for Equalizer territory. The project is on hold for now. I guess I'm hoping that Tom might add some of the Designer features that have been discussed more recently before I knock myself out. In this one the yellow territories are off-board and there's an individual set of them for every player.

Ozyman wrote:I'm curious if anyone has tried this, so I can not put in the effort to test myself.

#2) Give off-map territory a max=1, and a self-factory of -1. Then every world territory has a +1 factory on the off-map territory (including the off-map territory as a member.) So the off-map territory keeps itself alive as long as you have at least one world territory. Once you lose all of those, the beginning of your next turn, the off-map territory suicides itself and you eliminate yourself.

Do those both work?

#2 does works, but it is not very elegant. I had to use something like it for mine because I needed to create an additional function using an off-board capital to eliminate players when hold too many territories on the map.

Obviously, a "Token Territories" rule in the Developer would solve a lot of these problems.

The problem with #1 is that capitals cannot be assigned randomly. So, every game is the same. The obvious game-engine fix is for tom to make it so they can be.

I have thought about doing something similar (having a map of all capitals with some off-board territories that do stuff) and considered making a parallel set of territories for the territories on the world map. I would then assign those off-board territories randomly, and then the first round is just factories that take their matched on-map territory. (with 1 unit, and somehow no bonus units the first round so no attacking can take place), and then in the 2nd round a trigger to add units to every territory and neutralize all the matched off-board territories.

Theoretically I think it could be done, but it's wonky and would require a round here everyone just ends their turn.

Amidon37 is right. You can't execute #1 unless you are willing to have a preset starting position assigned. Of course you can create different starting scenarios. I have to admit that it's not a problem for a number of my board ideas.

I can think of a workaround if you want things randomly assigned, but it's a weird one. Make all on-map territories Neutral Capitals. Then create an off-board duplicate set of "Unassigned" "Placement Disabled" territories, one for each territory on the map proper. Put one unit on these doppelgänger territories, and set them to Auto capture their on-map counterparts and then destroy themselves on the following round by having them take a unit off themselves. I'm pretty sure the factory order will be executed before the territory is eliminated by itself.

The first round would effectively be a bye round for the first player. There would be no incentive to capture any territories because they would likely lose it by AutoCapture. (unless they want to take a chance that it may stay a neutral because of the Neutral Count settings." Subsequent players could attack previous players but would want to avoid neutral territories, and interestingly ..the last player could attack anyone with impunity. Personally, I'd prefer this method over one where you have to wait a turn at the end in order to be eliminated.

Hah, I just re-read Amidon37's solution. Apparently I wasn't paying close attention. I came up with pretty much the same idea.

Also a downside to #2 is there is no incentive to eliminate players (beyond just wanting them gone) since you can only eliminate yourself. Also won't count in the elimination stat.

Amidon37 wrote:Also a downside to #2 is there is no incentive to eliminate players (beyond just wanting them gone) since you can only eliminate yourself. Also won't count in the elimination stat.

Elimination stats never made sense to me. I pay no attention to them. The only stats that are worth anything to me are the ones related to winning. After all, in many cases waiting for someone else to do the eliminating can be the best strategy. If for some reason a designer wants to encourage eliminations, they can offer an elimination bonus.

I agree with you M57 but others do care about that stat - so a potential down side.. More importantly Ozy's #2 does not allow for an elimination bonus - which can effect game play.