Have you ever wondered what Warzone would be like if players took turns instead of all playing at the same time?

# Take Turns Mod

There’s a new mod available, called the **take turns mod**! In this mod, instead of all players entering orders every turn, players will alternate turns. For example, in a 1v1, one player would get to enter attacks on evened-numbered turns and the other would get to enter attacks on odd-numbered turns.

When it’s not your turn, you’ll still be prompted to enter orders like normal but you should instead just commit your turn without any orders. If you do enter orders, they’ll be ignored by the mod.

If you’re a member, give it a try and let me know what you think! You can use this template as a starting point.

# Mod Development Tutorial

I put together a video walking through how mods are developed. This is intended for people who know how to code already and are looking to see how to make a Warzone mod. Check it out and let me know what you think!

So this makes the game more like Risk?

I’d actually like to see a mod that does the opposite, ie: does away with the move # order entirely and executes all orders simultaneously.

how should this work.

You could maybe do a mod which make is so that each player can only attack once. Then the other player take its turn to attack once, then the next…

This could be interesting too.

But I like this “take turns” mod.

Not sure if I will ever use it though ðŸ˜€

Limiting the number of attacks would be an easy mod to write and could be very interesting.

I’m not sure how simultaneous attacks would work. Have you thought through the math?

You could actually do it with a work around. Have all attacks happen at the same time (literally) so attacking troops aren’t available to defend. (They are in transit.)

The tricky bit is what to do about returning troops if they fail their attack and their territory is taken, perhaps they can attack the troops in their own territory until they die!

ie. If you have Territory A with 10 troops, Territory B with 5 troops.

A attacks B with 6 and B attacks A with 5.

When troops from A arrive at B it’s empty to they take it, troops from B arrive at A with 4 defenders, kill 3 of them and 2 die, they fail to take the territory, leaving the 3 defending troops in A. The 3 remaining attackers then try and return home to B, finding it’s now occupied by 6 troops. They attack killing 2 of them, then all 3 attackers get killed.

Territory A ends up with 3 troops, territory B with 4 troops, both owned by the player who originally owned Territory A.

This could actually be really interesting and perhaps more realistic too! You’d always have to think about defense from attacking territories, very different game too!

My maths is out a little bit, territory A would have 1 troop left in it, sorry!

sounds horrible

I recomend making naval connections, a naval connection would mean it would take more troops to conquer the area. Its more realistic and (I hope!) shouldn’t be difficult to implement/use.

Great idea. I struggled a bit trying to figure out how to deal with all facets of simultaneous attacks. I thought that perhaps for a territory X which is attacking territory Y and being attacked by territory Z, then the attacking units from X (defending against the attacking units from Z) would meet in passing and we’d still have an attacker (Z)/defender (X) situation, but the question becomes what to do if X is attacking Z and Z is also attacking X – do we just give them both the same attacking kill rate, no defender bonus? And it gets hairy for 3+ players, such as: what if Y attacks X, and Z attacks X, where Z & Y are different players.

Methods of course can be developed to address this, such as the remaining forces end up fighting each other, which is not entirely different from what would happen in normal ordered moves (one would capture the territory first, then the next attacker would attack those units).

But your idea of just having the outgoing attacking units no longer present when invaders arrive makes it simple. And if the outgoing attacking units fail their attack, and someone has invaded in the interim, they have to now attack back into their former home.

So essentially there are 3 phases within a turn:

1) attacking units leave their starting territory

2) attacking units arrive at their destination territories, battle outcomes are determined

3) failed attacks return to their starting territories, if captured by another player they now battle to reclaim the territory

I suppose the 3+ player issue still remains though. The case where X attacks some other territory (not relevant), Y attacks X, and Z attacks X, where Z & Y are different players, how should the battles vs X be handled?

X1 = outgoing attacking units

X2 = remaining defending units

Y1 = incoming attacking units

Y2 = remaining units post attack

Z1 = incoming attacking units

Z2 = remaining units post attack

Phase 1:

– X1 units depart, and X2 units remain to defend against Y1 and Z1.

Phase 2:

– X2 does defense damage X2D, which is divided among Y1 and Z1 “appropriately”, which means it is divided 50/50 if this depletes neither Y1 and Z1, and if one is depleted, the additional damage is assigned to the other invading party, so no defense damage from X2D is wasted – it always applies to one party or the other. The armies remaining after this defense damage is taken is Y2 and Z2.

– Y1 and Z1 do attack damage Y1D and Z1D. The damage from each applies directly against X2, and if there is left over damage after X2 is depleted, it applies to the other invading party (Z1D depletes Y1, Y1D depletes Z1).

– The issue here is if the attacks Y1D and Z1D both fail to deplete X2, no problem, both Y2 and Z2 return to their origin territories, X2 remains on X as the victor. But if X2 reaches 0, yet both Y2 and Z2 >0, who gets territory X? X can’t because his units are all dead, but neither Y nor Z forces were sufficient to win over the other. In lieu of a better idea, let’s say the higher value of Y2 and Z2 remains, the lower value returns to its origin territory. And if Y2=Z2 … I guess it’s either the territory becomes neutral and both return home, or it’s a 50/50 random decision. Someone has to win or the territory becomes neutral. In this case, let’s say Y wins, Z returns to its origin.

Phase 3:

– X2 units return to X as attacker, Y2 is present as defender.

– X2 vs Y2 battle, resulting in remaining units X3 and Y3.

– If Y3 reaches 0, X3 reclaims X.

– If X0 reaches 0, Y3 retains X.

– But if neither X3 nor Y3 reach 0 – what then? X3 can’t go back to where it attacked (that doesn’t make sense), and it can’t stay on X (because it lost vs Y2). Until a better idea comes up, let’s say they enter a recurring cycle of death match battles until a winner is determined.

Overall I think it could work.