We're checking with the clashing PCs - me46 should be out soon.
One thing that has raised it's head from time to time that I would like to
discuss. It's generally accepted that the 60 Agent nations with +20%
kid/ass ability is a killer for the game - or as a large impact. Hence the
advent of the LAS (Limited assassination game - no Assassination SNA or
Stealth SNA) and the NKA (No kidnap or assassination allowed at all) game
As the player base for the FA scenario is some 100 players we can run 4-8
games of FA at a time. The question is how do I get a game going that is
fun, fluid as FA games are and yet have them filled within a reasonable time
period. (Say 3 months). Ie what rules should I use? My preference is that
there are a couple of scenarios available. I just had a player say that he
was happy to wait a year to play in the next game - seems a little weird
that to me. (As a player I want to play NOW! )
I think that the invincible fortress games that the NKA rules allow at
present are damaging to the NKA scenario in general.
My suggestion - and this is very much up for discussion - is to have 2
variants that I generally take set-ups for and then we can do other games
when there is a clear player base to support the game (such as LA, WoTR
etc).
1) Fourth Age - one +20% kidnap/Assassination allowed per allegiance with
the players who put their set-up in with the +20% in a random draw for who
gets it (or I can send them the respective contact details so that something
amicable can be sorted out). NK and SK not allowed the +20% kid/ass.
2) NKA game with no Kidnap or Assassination allowed but with some form of
restriction on the set-ups. The "impenetrable" locations (for discussion
but some are clear such as 3329, 4215) not allowed as starting PC locations
for anyone.
1) Fourth Age - one +20% kidnap/Assassination allowed per allegiance with
the players who put their set-up in with the +20% in a random draw for who
gets it (or I can send them the respective contact details so
that something amicable can be sorted out). NK and SK not allowed the
+20% kid/ass.
I've been an advocate of this for a long time. My PERSONAL way of doing it
would be to follow four rules:
A. All the Good nations combined get one +20 KA
B. All the Evil nations combined get one +20 KA
C. All the Neutral nations (except SK/NK) combined get one +20 KA.
D. The +20 KA will be randomly allocated among those nations that list it.
If a nation picked it, but did not get the random allocation, they get their
gold back and that's it.
Why? because +20 KA is such an overwhelming ability, and so amazingly
underpriced, that its cost should include the off chance that you are a
monetarily rich nation without lots of nifty special abilities. This would
really make it neat for team play. The problem is I can forsee a gamers who
hit the "reset" button when they don't get the Nation they exactly want.
EXAMPLE: (Good team) Three players all opt for the +20 KA. Randomly, one
player gets it. The other two just get the gold returned to them and do not
fill the SA slot.
Clint,
Have you ever tried simply banning the selection of the +20
kidnap/assass option? Seems like that would reduce the number of
nations that would be likely to design a agent kindap/assass specialist
nation-- especially since FA is such an emi based game as it is (i.e.,
the boilerplate winning setup includes AT LEAST one 50 emi, so that's
one less 60 agent that could be created. . plus, the high cost for 10
stealth also diminishes the ability to create a super agent without the
+20 kidnap/assass SNA). Speaking of which, has ANYONE (besides me!)
ever complained about emi's being so powerful in the game, and suggested
limiting their ability? My experiences with FA to date indicate it's an
emi-happy game, with the biggest competition being who can post the most
camps the fastest, then who can upgrade them all the quickest. Once
they've done that, they group up to form a virtually unstoppable InfYour
squad that can take down the mightiest of pop centers. Limiting agents
will probably simply lead to an even greater proliferation of emi's. It
also equates to the Dark Servant side being nothing but emi nations, as
the selection of non-humans is no longer attractive, and that allegience
doesn't have the diverse choices the Freeps do (human-emi
bonus/elves-mage bonus/dwarves-command bonus). To even things up a bit
and promote diversity, why not allow human race nations to also be able
to build 60 mages at 50 cost, and allow non-humans to build 60
commanders at 50 cost? Otherwise, you generally have all the neutrals
being emi nations, all or almost all of the DS nations being emi
nations, and the Freeps being as diverse as they choose to be! Guess I
kinda wandered off the main topic a bit, but I think these issues are
ones that can be addressed via startup limitations IF deemed
appropriate. Agents aren't the only ones in need of shackling!
Pat McDougall
Middle Earth PBM Games wrote:
···
We're checking with the clashing PCs - me46 should be out soon.
One thing that has raised it's head from time to time that I would like to
discuss. It's generally accepted that the 60 Agent nations with +20%
kid/ass ability is a killer for the game - or as a large impact. Hence the
advent of the LAS (Limited assassination game - no Assassination SNA or
Stealth SNA) and the NKA (No kidnap or assassination allowed at all) game
As the player base for the FA scenario is some 100 players we can run 4-8
games of FA at a time. The question is how do I get a game going that is
fun, fluid as FA games are and yet have them filled within a reasonable time
period. (Say 3 months). Ie what rules should I use? My preference is that
there are a couple of scenarios available. I just had a player say that he
was happy to wait a year to play in the next game - seems a little weird
that to me. (As a player I want to play NOW! )
I think that the invincible fortress games that the NKA rules allow at
present are damaging to the NKA scenario in general.
My suggestion - and this is very much up for discussion - is to have 2
variants that I generally take set-ups for and then we can do other games
when there is a clear player base to support the game (such as LA, WoTR
etc).
1) Fourth Age - one +20% kidnap/Assassination allowed per allegiance with
the players who put their set-up in with the +20% in a random draw for who
gets it (or I can send them the respective contact details so that something
amicable can be sorted out). NK and SK not allowed the +20% kid/ass.
2) NKA game with no Kidnap or Assassination allowed but with some form of
restriction on the set-ups. The "impenetrable" locations (for discussion
but some are clear such as 3329, 4215) not allowed as starting PC locations
for anyone.
The Limited Agent Scenario (LAS) games prohibit taking that SNA (+20 kid/ass), as
well as the Stealth and Double-Scout SNAs. I am in an LAS game, and I can tell you
that with NO NATION able to take those SNAs, agents still play an integral part. While
they don't become a major factor until later in the game, by the mid teen turns,
assassinations begin to ramp up. We're in our early 30 turns, and including all
assassinations on both sides, there are probably 2-8 per turn.
I firmly believe that the +20 kidnap/assassinate SNA should be eliminated completely
for any special scenario designed to limit agents. We're not using it, and agents are
still a factor, though not the all powerful one that they normally are. As for the
Stealth and Double-Scout SNAs, those are debateable. I've always had really bad luck
with stealth, so I don't care if you ditch that one. In fact it would probably help by
making the assassination squad (AS) a bit easier to find. However, eliminating the
Double-Scout SNA seems to both hurt AND help an AS. It hurts an AS by making targets
harder to find, but helps it by making agents, (which are already hard to detect),
even harder to detect. This is mainly a factor in using emissaries in defensive rolls
to double agents.
I agree that the NKA variant makes some fortress cities virtually impossible to
crack. (It also breeds armies like crazy, as everyone has a bunch of 1-commander
armies running around the board.) It is probably best to allow some sort of agent
activity to stop the invincible fortresses. (I just wish armies didn't go away when
their commander died, but that's another issue.)
In short, for a scenario designed to limit agents, I would suggest using the LAS
format which is already in use. Namely, NO NATION could take the following SNAs:
The reason for LAS and NKA game popularity is that a lot of players want to limit
assassinations. The proposed format allowing one nation to take the +20 kid/ass SNA
(and all nations to take double scout/recon & stealth) would make agents stronger than
in either current agent limiting game type.
Having played in both types, the LAS has a better feel to it, though agent power is
still strong enough to make them very troubling. I wouldn't like a scenario that made
them stronger than LAS. The NKA scenario is just strange, though it is enjoyable in
its own way. But the invincible fortress syndrome is frustrating, (in spite of
weakness squads), and every time I look at my map I see swarms of army icons all over
the place, since backup commanders are almost unheard of. Strange.
Mike Mulka
···
-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick & Stacey McDougall [mailto:psmcdoug@home.com]
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2001 9:41 PM
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] NKA game 46 and future games of NKA
Clint,
Have you ever tried simply banning the selection of the +20
kidnap/assass option?
I'd treat it like nation allocations in 1650/2950...you say there are
2 kingdoms open, one good, neutral, evil +20 k/a nation and when they
get taken the slot is used up.
I would also notify all players at game start which nations have +20
k/a, since the fame of their killers has spread far and wide. This
compensates for the extra power.
And geographic balance is a must. I dislike paying $150 for a game
that can be grossly imbalanced by random turn 0 choices in nation
position. NKA#1 was badly distorted by the distribution of setups.
Marc
--- In mepbmlist@y..., "Jeffery A. Dobberpuhl" <webguys@l...> wrote:
> 1) Fourth Age - one +20% kidnap/Assassination allowed per
allegiance with
> the players who put their set-up in with the +20% in a random draw
for who
> gets it (or I can send them the respective contact details so
> that something amicable can be sorted out). NK and SK not allowed
the
+20% kid/ass.
>
I've been an advocate of this for a long time. My PERSONAL way of
doing it
would be to follow four rules:
A. All the Good nations combined get one +20 KA
B. All the Evil nations combined get one +20 KA
C. All the Neutral nations (except SK/NK) combined get one +20 KA.
D. The +20 KA will be randomly allocated among those nations that
list it.
If a nation picked it, but did not get the random allocation, they
get their
gold back and that's it.
Why? because +20 KA is such an overwhelming ability, and so
amazingly
underpriced, that its cost should include the off chance that you
are a
monetarily rich nation without lots of nifty special abilities. This
would
really make it neat for team play. The problem is I can forsee a
gamers who
hit the "reset" button when they don't get the Nation they exactly
want.
EXAMPLE: (Good team) Three players all opt for the +20 KA. Randomly,
one
player gets it. The other two just get the gold returned to them and
I would also notify all players at game start which nations have +20
k/a, since the fame of their killers has spread far and wide. This
compensates for the extra power.
Have you ever tried simply banning the selection of the +20
kidnap/assass option?
Yes this was the Limited Assassination game for which I had minimal
interest.
Speaking of which, has ANYONE (besides me!)
ever complained about emi's being so powerful in the game, and suggested
limiting their ability?
Yes - they are the fall back position for nations not choosing Agents @60.
My experiences with FA to date indicate it's an
emi-happy game, with the biggest competition being who can post the most
camps the fastest, then who can upgrade them all the quickest.
*** Not quite - military might is somewhat under-rated but still very
playable.
I would like to have Zones allocated. We just created a game with 6 teams
of 4 in it and allocated the zones randomly. I think something like that
can work.
Then I could allocate nations and alignments in a zone?
Problem would be players wanting to play in a particular area.
Thoughts?
Clint
···
I'd treat it like nation allocations in 1650/2950...you say there are
2 kingdoms open, one good, neutral, evil +20 k/a nation and when they
get taken the slot is used up.
I would also notify all players at game start which nations have +20
k/a, since the fame of their killers has spread far and wide. This
compensates for the extra power.
And geographic balance is a must. I dislike paying $150 for a game
that can be grossly imbalanced by random turn 0 choices in nation
position. NKA#1 was badly distorted by the distribution of setups.
Marc
--- In mepbmlist@y..., "Jeffery A. Dobberpuhl" <webguys@l...> wrote:
>
>
> > 1) Fourth Age - one +20% kidnap/Assassination allowed per
allegiance with
> > the players who put their set-up in with the +20% in a random draw
for who
> > gets it (or I can send them the respective contact details so
> > that something amicable can be sorted out). NK and SK not allowed
the
> +20% kid/ass.
> >
>
>
> I've been an advocate of this for a long time. My PERSONAL way of
doing it
> would be to follow four rules:
> A. All the Good nations combined get one +20 KA
> B. All the Evil nations combined get one +20 KA
> C. All the Neutral nations (except SK/NK) combined get one +20 KA.
> D. The +20 KA will be randomly allocated among those nations that
list it.
> If a nation picked it, but did not get the random allocation, they
get their
> gold back and that's it.
>
> Why? because +20 KA is such an overwhelming ability, and so
amazingly
> underpriced, that its cost should include the off chance that you
are a
> monetarily rich nation without lots of nifty special abilities. This
would
> really make it neat for team play. The problem is I can forsee a
gamers who
> hit the "reset" button when they don't get the Nation they exactly
want.
>
> EXAMPLE: (Good team) Three players all opt for the +20 KA. Randomly,
one
> player gets it. The other two just get the gold returned to them and
do not
> fill the SA slot.
I thought the game set up was perfect. Just because two of us had the
entire northeast corner to ourselves should not be construed as unbalanced.
Just joking. It indeed was strange.
nathan
···
And geographic balance is a must. I dislike paying $150 for a game
that can be grossly imbalanced by random turn 0 choices in nation
position. NKA#1 was badly distorted by the distribution of setups.
)