Daledvm wrote:
Randomizing the first move might be helpful in balancing the sides. However, I think this would lend itself to taking risks and gambling.
Randomizing the first move also takes away from the back story of the game. PL goes first because it is supposed to be the _aggressor_. That isn't critical to me, but it has come up before and others have raised it as a concern.
As for encouraging risk taking...I don't see a problem with that. I've often setup FNU on a completely offensive footing...the larger the map, the more likely I am to do that. Is it a risk? Sure. But it has on occasion led to a rapid victory. With the first move randomized, FNU would be a bit more likely to take a risk in hopes of moving first, but PL would be a bit less likely. So it would balance out.
My strategy would likely be: If I have a good defensible starting position, I'd setup somewhat defensive and hope my enemy makes a mistake I can exploit. If I have a bad starting position or one where I could have two territories attack a neutral or SA large territory, I'd set up more offensively.
I think I favor Maelstrom's position. Let FNU see what country PL has disclosed, but not it's troop deployement. This would actually fit the back story very well. FNU can tell that some crisis is rising and is able to deply troops in response, but can't use them until the threat is fully realized. For FNU to disclose allies and deploy troops without any indication about which countries will fall to the PL doesn't make a lot of sense.