|
|
|
 |

June 7th, 2008, 10:05 AM
|
 |
General
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, ME (USA)
Posts: 3,241
Thanks: 31
Thanked 65 Times in 18 Posts
|
|
Re: RAND REDUX
@ Zenzei: The game is currently full, but I will put you on the waiting list, Zenzei, if that changes.
@ Calmon: Jurri is taking a break for now. Ano was originally going to play, but it's my understanding that he'd rather not play if the CB mod is used. I don't think Ironhawk likes RAND games (it was the Alexander game that he was late for).
Pasha
|

June 7th, 2008, 10:11 AM
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,414
Thanks: 26
Thanked 73 Times in 49 Posts
|
|
Re: RAND REDUX
Yeah, just yeah! I just hope I get some decent nation that time, not Atlantis  Hmm... I would be really happy with some resource heavy nation for a change, never really played them.
|

June 7th, 2008, 10:15 AM
|
 |
General
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, ME (USA)
Posts: 3,241
Thanks: 31
Thanked 65 Times in 18 Posts
|
|
Re: RAND REDUX
I am happy with any victory condition, because I am just hosting. We'll got with whatever the majority of players prefers, if there is a clear preference.
VP's in capitals is a good way to go, of course. Or, we could do a % of provinces with no VP's, etc. Whichever.
|

June 7th, 2008, 04:27 PM
|
 |
General
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Posts: 3,465
Thanks: 511
Thanked 162 Times in 86 Posts
|
|
Re: RAND REDUX
Quote:
PashaDawg said:
I am happy with any victory condition, because I am just hosting. We'll got with whatever the majority of players prefers, if there is a clear preference.
VP's in capitals is a good way to go, of course. Or, we could do a % of provinces with no VP's, etc. Whichever.
|
Would something between 60%-70% controlled provinces work?
|

June 7th, 2008, 04:41 PM
|
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,968
Thanks: 24
Thanked 221 Times in 46 Posts
|
|
Re: RAND REDUX
I think that might result in just a different kind of teleport grab. Capital only VPs have their flaws, but I think they are probably still the most reasonable way to go.
EDIT: I also think 160 provinces is fine for 13 players, so I hope we do end up using Rim of Darkness.
|

June 7th, 2008, 05:10 PM
|
 |
Second Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 436
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: RAND REDUX
Same victory conditions as before is fine with me, 50% Capital VPs (7 of 13).
|

June 7th, 2008, 05:20 PM
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,414
Thanks: 26
Thanked 73 Times in 49 Posts
|
|
Re: RAND REDUX
Capitol VPs seem fine. I also like the idea of 3 turn hold to make it count, but that is not really necessary with forts...
QM:
12 provs per player?
|

June 7th, 2008, 10:22 AM
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 235
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: RAND REDUX
@Pasha: Okay
|

June 7th, 2008, 04:22 PM
|
Major
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,226
Thanks: 12
Thanked 86 Times in 48 Posts
|
|
Re: RAND REDUX
I'm gonna put in a vote for Cap-VPs. They're important enough provinces that doming them isn't unreasonable once it's late enough in the game where a teleport strike force could happen, and they'll come with a fort unless someone goes crazy with the whole scorched earth thing. Unforted VPs just beg for aerial assault.
A province % would also be fine, though I'd prefer to see a "take and hold for 3 turns" condition with a reasonable % instead of having to set the % artificially high to make a teleport scenario impractical. Obviously this means there would have to be some hand-counting going on since the game ends immediately otherwise.
I like the cap idea best though, it's more fun having actually important provinces to protect instead of just getting hit by 10 ghost riders and teleporting raiders a turn as the whole world tries to keep your prov count down late game =)
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|