Subject:
|
Re: big brikwars game...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.gaming
|
Date:
|
Thu, 11 May 2000 18:07:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1507 times
|
| |
|
|
I have to agree with Mike here ... when I first read the initial posting, I shuddered at the
prospect of a huge game. Our second NELUG game (the one that we finished) took about 4 hours
to play to conclusion (11:30 to 5:00, with about an hour for lunch - setup and stats and
everything was done before that), with each of the five people fielding 300 points worth of
troops and equipment. The entire game took about 4 turns for each side. We'd all played the
game at least once before, and most of the scoring of troops and equipment had been done ahead
of time. I'm afraid a *really* large scale battle could really bog down - though Mike's
suggestions could certainly help alleviate that problem and streamline the process.
Another possible way to run the game would be to have a number of smaller battles throughout
the weekend. I'm typing as I'm thinking this through, but I like the idea of a
campaign/tournament style, in which only units that survive one battle can make an appearance
in the next one (even losers in a battle can have survivors if the games have specific
objectives versus "destroy all enemy troops" - plus, cowardice and fleeing appropriately can
do wonders for longevity ;) At the end of the campaign, there will be some very special
troops who have weathered all storms and now stand proud. Of course, this doesn't work for
someone who loses all of their troops, or who wants to field new creations halfway through the
event.
I guess I don't know the best way to do it. I'd just be careful about trying to undertake a
huge game, lest it move too slowly to keep people interested.
My thoughts and opinions are supplied free of charge, and, as such, have little to no market
value. Feel free to discard at will ;)
shaun
Stephen F Roberts wrote:
> "Jeff Stembel" <aulddragon@wamalug.org> wrote:
>
> > In lugnet.fun.gaming, Stephen F. Roberts writes:
> > > ...We were going to do some Brikwars at the East Coast Brikfest (june 9-11,
> > > join lugnet.org.us.wamalug for info), Jeff proposed a 'round the
> > > clock/continuous game' kind of thing. So I'm posting my initial ideas for how
> > > to structure this thing to get feedback/ideas from youse guys.
> > >
> > >
> > > My idea: Kinda like a 'king of the hill' scenario.
> > >
> > > ...I was thinking of a big area with some 'target' spots on it. Players start
> > > from any edge (or maybe some defined 'landing zones') and get points at the
> > > end of their turn for having a minifig alive and kicking uncontested in a
> > > target.
> >
> > I was thinking of a "Last man standing" kinda thing. Basically, just try to
> > take out all vehicles/troops, and whoever has the most points at the end wins.
> > Points would be equal to the CPs of the enemy units destroyed. I've been
> > thinking about allowing teams/alliances, too, so the person who brings two
> > hundred troops won't have an overwhelming advantage.
>
> ...They'd have an overwhelming advantage, but specially if we use the divide by points
> fielded idea, they still wouldn't necessarily come out best. And if we have several target
> areas spread out by >30", if the player with 200 pts wanted to take more than 1, theyd
> have to spread out, making them an easier target if another player concentrated.
>
> ...This whole thing kinda hinges on there being enuf players who want to play. And there
> should be fewer targets than players (musical chairs :-). This would force someone to be
> the 'odd man out' and have to fight to get in. Also, make less defendable target areas
> worth more. Like a target that's in a field surrounded by light cover is worth a lot more
> than a target that has some cover.
>
> > > ...New players can start at any time by just grabbing a squad or two and
> > > joining a table edge. If any player gets wiped out, they can just grab a new
> > > squad and join in again (points keep adding up).
> >
> > What if someone fields their entire force at the beginning? Should there be a
> > wait time before they can field the same units again, or can they not field
> > them again at all?
>
> ...Hmmm... ok, they cant field anything more until they have lost everything else on the
> board. Then maybe make them wait a round and they can re-field the force, but the new
> fielding adds to their total CP. This would let players come with a small force and just
> keep reusing it over and over (multiplying their total CP every time).
>
> > > ...And to reward good play, perhaps divide their points by how many CPs total
> > > they brought in. So players who bring in huge forces wont necessarily do
> > > better than players who bring in a couple small teams.
> >
> > This would definitely make the scoring fairer. A must if there is no limit to
> > the amount someone is able to field.
>
> ...I guess, depending on how big the field is and how many players there are, we might
> need to limit how much is fielded at one time by a player... but this may be something we
> have to find out as we play.. :-/
>
> > > possible other things:
> > > ...give points for each fig killed (maybe 100 points for a target, 10 pts for
> > > a fig?) to encourage bloodshed :-)
> >
> > Basing this on the troop's CP would be better, as a trooper with a deathgun is
> > more of a challenge than one with a pistol.
>
> ...Yea, but if everyone is worth the same, you'll go after all the cannon fodder, leading
> to more bloodshed! :-) I was thinking 10 pts each just to make the math easier, at 10pts
> each, just put a tick mark on a sheet vice having to write down all the kill cps.
>
> > > ...bonus points for spectacular deaths (small missile takes out 15 figs), best
> > > unit, amazing saves (1 fig survives full onslaught of a heavy mecha), most
> > > stoopid thing done, etc
> >
> > This has possibilities... :)
> >
> > > ...some fixed 'neutral' weapons or bunkers that can be operated by whoever
> > > happens to get them (optionally, neutral weapons are indestructible).
> >
> > Indestructible might not be a good thing... A smart player could have some
> > troops hole up in a bunker and make them nigh invincible. Weapon choice would
> > play a big part here. On the other hand, major bonus points could be
> > awarded...
>
> ...But if the bunkers and weapons arent part of the target zones, they could hole up there
> all day and still not win (tho get lots of points for killing ppl! :-)
>
> ...you can go back to ignoring me now...
>
> wubwub
> stephen f roberts
> wamalug guy (http://wamalug.org)
> wildlink.com
> lugnet #160
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: big brikwars game...
|
| (...) ...They'd have an overwhelming advantage, but specially if we use the divide by points fielded idea, they still wouldn't necessarily come out best. And if we have several target areas spread out by >30", if the player with 200 pts wanted to (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.gaming)
|
44 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
