Pink 13 armies on turn two in the following game:

https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=10510255

The extra armies for each territory controlled setting was on. Since pink had 8 territories, the income was 8 + income from bonuses.

Settings --> Armies --> Extra armies for territories = Extra army for every one territory


- Formula for extra territories giving armies -
Base income * territories required to receive one army = Product. Subtract the Product from the number of territories owned = Difference. Divide the Difference by the number of territories required to receive one army = extra armies from territories (rounded down).

- For your specifically linked game -
Base income (2) * armies for every one territory (1) = 2. You then subtract that 2 from his 8 territories, leaving 6. Divide those 6 by 1 = 6. Round down (n/a). You are left with 6 extra territory income.

Therefore, on turn 2, Pink had : 2 base income + 5 income for bonuses + 6 extra armies for additional territories = 13 total income.

(Edit - Master Jz's version is easier for this example since it was set for every one territory, if it's more complicated this is a usable formula.)

Edited 2/12/2016 06:31:07

The important thing to remember is that troops per territory only take effect once the value exceeds the base income.

(Exactly like in Risk the board game)

Edited 2/12/2016 06:41:03

"Extra Army for Every One Territory" -- In the Army Settings.


So by going through the history move by move,
starting right after the picks are made:

we can see that taking Paris bumps their income from 3 to 6,
taking Scythia bumps their income from 6 to 7,
taking Haemimontus bumps their income from 7 to 8,
taking Hispalis bumps their income from 8 to 10,
taking Qsonoba bumps their income from 10 to 13 by the end of the first turn.

The settings are very complex, and very very interesting,
and coupled with manual distribution,
it's clearly skewed in the favor of someone who has spent a lot of time studying the map and the settings,
and usually the person who has created the game match has studied them most,
even if the settings are fair and equitable to all,
simply because they went through the efforts of setting up the game.

Having unfair settings is not against the rules.


I would recommend avoiding the manual distribution setting in real time games,
along with most non-default settings.

I would also be hesitant to play against this person,
particularly in games that they had created.

---

That's a good point, Fleecemaster, but since the base income was two armies per turn,
it was easily exceeded. :)

Edited 2/12/2016 06:49:14

Thanks all for the clarification, I have played hundreds of games but have never seen/heard of that setting. Most games are won by players missing surprise game setups. Thanks again.

I'm glad we were able to help. :)

You can highlight most settings that are "Out of the ordinary" here:

https://www.warlight.net/SettingsHighlight

BUT for some reason you can't highlight if there are armies per territory. Personally I find that both odd and very annoying, cos it does have a huge impact on the game...

Thats why I advise to join games where Host has taken time and written out particular settings in description, describing what is the meaning and idea behind each setting aspect : Why they are the way they are or not? What is the concept of Template and what is the optimal way to play it! Each host probably has some previous experience and advantage, one must count for that, but it is much advisable by host to introduce the Template to others as well.

Everyone can read the settings and sole blame lies on the one who missed that part, but single settings can create co-impact that is not fathomable in first sight. Choose the players you play with: only one fool-proof method to avoid bad players and bad games!

Edited 2/13/2016 09:40:59