All these ideas sound really interesting, but aren't they (and many other) already covered bu the FA scenario? Isntead of swaping points of starting characters and moving PCs around, it sounds simpler and more interesting to create them from scratch.
Rodrigo
Stephen Pickering wrote:
···
> How about allowing players to swap a useless 10 points of secondary skill for 10 points of skill elsewhere? Eg a character who starts at E30 M10 could become an E40; or a C30 at the capital could be improved to a C40.
>
> How about allowing each player to decide where his characters, armies and navies start, and who commands which army/navy? This could change the whole early game strategy.
>
nice ideas
also, how about also allowing those nations which start with artifacts to decide which artifacts start with which characters, also maybe allow each nation to change the location of one or two non capital pop centres by one or two hexes.
again it'll change early strategies and freshen things up a little.
Alan
Some interesting ideas here but might have to ban free deploment some for reasons of game balance say. (i.e. what about if N Gondor set up with ~90% of his forces ar Minas Ithil and ploughed straight into Mordor. Presuming that players would still be limited to starting on their own Pop centres it might be difficult for the DS to block something like this. I could be wrong in this example,. as a new player, with 4 turns experience but I bet there are at least a few cases that could be unbalancing).
The idea of some Pop Centres moving slighly, if possible would have one useful bonus. (I say if possible because I would be suprized if it hasn't been suggested before in this case). It seems an obvious solution for 'hiden' centres. If they could be moved one hex in the player's choice, possibly with some moves banned, if would restore their original security. Opposing players would then have to grop around a bit using reveal centre to locate the hex before revealing the centre itself. That would be far more of a task than just researching the spell, going to the known location and Oh, I found this enemy centre. Also, since it would probbaly take a few turns it means there would be a cost in having an army sitting around waiting to jump on the centre as soon as it's discovered.
Allowing transfer of 10 ranks to other classes could be most important in saving money for a number of powers. In the post-plague world they often have no characters with 30 ranks in a class and hence have to pay 10k for a new character.
--
"Mortis In Anima
Curam Gero Cutis"
Carl Orff - "Carmina Burana"
Rodrigo Manhaes wrote:
> All these ideas sound really interesting, but aren't they (and many
> other) already covered bu the FA scenario? Isntead of swaping points
> of starting characters and moving PCs around, it sounds simpler and
> more interesting to create them from scratch.
I don't play FA, but I would play this scenario, mostly because my understanding of FA is there are major rule differences, and you have to completely set up your entire nation. If Clint had a scenario where I could tweak an existing 1650/2950 nation, I'd play that.
jason
···
--
Jason Bennett, jasonab@acm.org
E pur si muove!
All these ideas sound really interesting, but aren't they (and many other) already covered bu the FA scenario? Isntead of swaping points of starting characters and moving PCs around, it sounds simpler and more interesting to create them from scratch.
Rodrigo
RD: Some of these ideas are indeed covered in FA, but Clint asked for suggested tweaks to a 1650 scenario.
Personally I much prefer 1650 (tweaked or not) to either 2950 or FA.
Richard.
Stephen Pickering wrote:
···
----- Original Message -----
From: Rodrigo Manhaes
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2002 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Digest Number 1020
> > How about allowing players to swap a useless 10 points of secondary skill for 10 points of skill elsewhere? Eg a character who starts at E30 M10 could become an E40; or a C30 at the capital could be improved to a C40.
> >
> > How about allowing each player to decide where his characters, armies and navies start, and who commands which army/navy? This could change the whole early game strategy.
> >
>
> nice ideas
>
> also, how about also allowing those nations which start with artifacts to decide which artifacts start with which characters, also maybe allow each nation to change the location of one or two non capital pop centres by one or two hexes.
>
> again it'll change early strategies and freshen things up a little.
>
> Alan
>
> Some interesting ideas here but might have to ban free deploment some for reasons of game balance say. (i.e. what about if N Gondor set up with ~90% of his forces ar Minas Ithil and ploughed straight into Mordor. Presuming that players would still be limited to starting on their own Pop centres it might be difficult for the DS to block something like this. I could be wrong in this example,. as a new player, with 4 turns experience but I bet there are at least a few cases that could be unbalancing).
>
> The idea of some Pop Centres moving slighly, if possible would have one useful bonus. (I say if possible because I would be suprized if it hasn't been suggested before in this case). It seems an obvious solution for 'hiden' centres. If they could be moved one hex in the player's choice, possibly with some moves banned, if would restore their original security. Opposing players would then have to grop around a bit using reveal centre to locate the hex before revealing the centre itself. That would be far more of a task than just researching the spell, going to the known location and Oh, I found this enemy centre. Also, since it would probbaly take a few turns it means there would be a cost in having an army sitting around waiting to jump on the centre as soon as it's discovered.
>
> Allowing transfer of 10 ranks to other classes could be most important in saving money for a number of powers. In the post-plague world they often have no characters with 30 ranks in a class and hence have to pay 10k for a new character.
--
"Mortis In Anima
Curam Gero Cutis"
Carl Orff - "Carmina Burana"
Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
FA is quite a different game in terms of military and strategic play. I would like to design a balanced set of nations for a FA game as a different project.
Something I find annoying in Grudge games is the ability for Military nations to act in the game. (With the game such a very good military game I think that this has the impact of detracting from the actual game play). With so many PCs in the mountains at game start you need Emis to get to them in any strength - it's not impossible with Armies but very difficult. (In 1650/2950 virtually all major PCs are on the roads as would be consistent with a "real world" interpretation of population growth and control of trade routes.)
From a GM perspective 1650 is still the most popular scenario by a long shot. 2950 then 1000 games. (Although both 2950 and 1000 have a recent increase in player base relative to 1650 I am glad to say).
Back to my point: I know that lots of players like to have an invincible power base, with 100/100/100/100 characters and 94 pcs all City/Citadels (with at least half hidden) (appeals to me actually!) but I think this makes a worse game than one with limited resources and hence some of the skill to be brought into play is one on resource management. Capitals in mountain hexes (no roads), but boardering a non-mountains hex detract from that.
All these ideas sound really interesting, but aren't they (and many other) already covered bu the FA scenario? Isntead of swaping points of starting characters and moving PCs around, it sounds simpler and more interesting to create them from scratch.
Just some musings.
Clint
> All these ideas sound really interesting, but aren't they (and many
> other) already covered bu the FA scenario? Isntead of swaping points
> of starting characters and moving PCs around, it sounds simpler and
> more interesting to create them from scratch.
I don't play FA, but I would play this scenario, mostly because my
understanding of FA is there are major rule differences, and you have to
completely set up your entire nation. If Clint had a scenario where I
could tweak an existing 1650/2950 nation, I'd play that.
*** Okay I am interested in working this more. Any thoughts on how this could be done as a generic rule base for the 1650/2950 scenario?
Something that I would immediately get into the game is less players - seeing how the game for variant works finding players is hard to do here so having say 7v7 with 3 neutrals would be better (or no Neutrals would be my personal choice as a player, but I would not want to take that away from the players).
Clint
I don't play FA, but I would play this scenario, mostly because my
understanding of FA is there are major rule differences, and you have to
completely set up your entire nation. If Clint had a scenario where I
could tweak an existing 1650/2950 nation, I'd play that.
*** Okay I am interested in working this more. Any thoughts on how this
could be done as a generic rule base for the 1650/2950 scenario?
Something that I would immediately get into the game is less players -
seeing how the game for variant works finding players is hard to do here so
having say 7v7 with 3 neutrals would be better (or no Neutrals would be my
personal choice as a player, but I would not want to take that away from
the players).
Clint
RD: I agree with you as a player, Clint. Get rid of the neutrals. If you are playtesting a variant, you do not want players to be sidetracked by having to negotiate with neutrals as well.
Which nations would you keep and which would you drop (apart from neutrals)? This could have a major effect on game balance. My first thought is to take out the 3 nations on each side who are closest to the periphery of the map. So DS would lose:
Quiet Avenger
Blind Sorceror
Long Rider
FP would lose:
Noldo
Northmen
Eothraim (not on the periphery but to balance the removal of BS and LR).
That should stir up a hornet's nest!
Richard.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
