Craigm999 wrote:
Yeah, been racking my brain on this a bit since we started with the Points Formula, i think your ideas could work, and the other options i came up with are;
1. Compare activation counts pre-game - for every 5 activations difference the player with the lower count is awarded 10% extra points to spend until the difference is <5?
Pros - brings the activation count to a close balance.
cons - difficult to manage unless there is a good bit of pre-game conversation. could be abused (in a 5000pt game for example the weaker player could simple buy another titan or something, rather than cheap units!)
2. Asymmetrical victory conditions - Tie activation count and VPs to create a varying goal for each of the players (10% or 5%?).
something like - reduce the VP condition for the player with the lower Activations by the difference.
e.g. in a 5000pt game with player A having 30 activations vs Player B having 39 it would be
50 VPs for Player B, and 41 for Player A
Pros - potentially balances things a bit? easy enough to work out pre-game.
Cons - Might stagnate games (players with lots of cheap units wary to sacrifice them due to their effectively higher VP yield to the opposition) - could be open to abuse again.
3. Break/Change the formation rules - A bit more drastic than the ones above, and currently being discussed elsewhere. rather than using the traditional SM2/NE:G army card structure we could change this out for 'build your own' based on a frame work, in the style of AT/SM1, Flames of War, Epic 40k etc.
This might balance by having activation at the 'formation/platoon/company' level, rather than detachment.
E.g. both sides have the same points value to choose, but also have a formation limit (say 10 for 5k for the sake of example) meaning both get the same number of activations (although the number of individual units in these formations could vary greatly - there might need to be lower/upper limit in terms of points/units in each)
these 10 formations are activated back and forth - the players therefor make the choice of how much they want to put in each (this would affect the BP/VP, coherency etc... for the formation)
a player could choose to have a unit of 6 scout stands as 1 of the 10 formations, and in another could have an entire battle company - each would be 1 of the 10 activations.
Pros - shakes up the game, could be interesting! balances the number of activations per turn to 1:1 (until whole formations are destroyed!)
Cons - Not really part of this discussion, difficult to implement - not going to happen in the short term!
Hi!
Number 3 is the way to go Bissler. This is what Magnus and I proposed to accomplish.
Its the only real definite solution, since most others tend to be stop gap measures that don't truly solve the problem.
Heck Bissler, since you seem to get enough games in, would you like me to give you those projected organization charts for those armies you use the most and you can test them yourself?
Primarch