Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 2
  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Blitzkreig
pixelgeek
 Post subject: Blitzkreig
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 9:30 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Has there been any talk about changing the Blitzkreig victory condition back to its original (and IMO far superior) version whereby you needed to control the two table edge objectives?

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: Blitzkreig
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 9:54 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand
That sounds like a good idea to me.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Chroma
 Post subject: Blitzkreig
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 2:13 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(pixelgeek @ Feb. 10 2008,08:30)
QUOTE
Has there been any talk about changing the Blitzkreig victory condition back to its original (and IMO far superior) version whereby you needed to control the two table edge objectives?

Since a "blitzkrieg" is "lightning war" push piercing deep into enemy territory, why would you have to hold your *own* Blitz objective?  To represent a connection with friendly lines?

I think a better "option" for the Blitzkrieg objective, that would prevent the "single unit rush", is changing the condition to "Two of your formations control the enemy Blitz objective".

That way, having one formation there would still help for Take and Hold, but you'd have to dedicate two formations to do a Blitz.

Thoughts?

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Soren
 Post subject: Blitzkreig
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:34 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 9:42 am
Posts: 694
Location: Austria
Depend too much on army size. So popcorn armies can easily grab this objective, while armies with low activation count can never get it.  Not a good idea I think.

_________________
Attrition is the proof of absence of Strategy
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Chroma
 Post subject: Blitzkreig
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:42 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(Soren @ Feb. 10 2008,15:34)
QUOTE
Depend too much on army size. So popcorn armies can easily grab this objective, while armies with low activation count can never get it. ?Not a good idea I think.

Nowadays, a single Jetbike/Rough Rider/Land Speeder can wait til the last activation to march out and grab it, it's not limited to "popcorn" armies... and such armies tend to get savaged a lot.

I feel Blitz should be tough to get...

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
zombocom
 Post subject: Blitzkreig
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:43 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569
I personally feel that formations shouldn't be able to march and claim objectives.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Blitzkreig
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:45 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
I like the current objective system, because they become more valuable in a linear fashion as you get closer to the enemy table edge.


I also feel that formations shouldn't be able to march to claim objectives.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
pixelgeek
 Post subject: Blitzkreig
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:59 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

(Evil and Chaos @ Feb. 10 2008,07:45)
QUOTE
I like the current objective system...

The problem with the current system is that you can get Blitzkreig and Take and Hold too easily.

In fact as part of Take and Hold you can get Blitzkreig for free.

The old requirements were actually tougher to get and, more critically, it was a distinct condition and not a subset of one of the other objectives.

I also feel that formations shouldn't be able to march to claim objectives.


Rather OT.

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Chroma
 Post subject: Blitzkreig
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 5:00 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(Evil and Chaos @ Feb. 10 2008,15:45)
QUOTE
I also feel that formations shouldn't be able to march to claim objectives.

Have you guys tried the "no marching" to get objectives?  Does that include "contesting" them?

You'd have a hard time winning by Victory Conditions, I'd say... you can't rush back to defend your own objectives nor make a push to grab the enemy ones... I think a lot of unintended consequences would come out of that.

But let's give it a playtest try!

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Blitzkreig
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 5:04 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
We tried probably ~fourty games with 'no marching to claim, but may contest'.

So yeah, we've playtested it. :D

It worked nicely.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
zombocom
 Post subject: Blitzkreig
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 6:01 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569
Yep, we played it that way for a long time, by mistake. It works an awful lot better, as it's much harder to just keep a formation hidden then march to either blitz as the last activation. It makes thinking ahead a lot more important.

It makes for a much better game, while also making it harder to take the blitz, which is what this topic is about...

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Mephiston
 Post subject: Blitzkreig
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 6:23 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:52 pm
Posts: 4262
Considering the number of games that I play both in friendlies and at tournaments that end in draws, with one side having maybe one objective, I think the current system is generally at the correct level of difficulty regarding capturing  objectives.
Top
 Profile  
 
Kleomenes
 Post subject: Blitzkreig
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 6:32 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 1:39 pm
Posts: 227
I havent really experienced anything outrageous with regards to the blitz objective so far myself. I agree with Mephiston (not just because of his Blood Angel allegiance) in that the objective system isnt far off the mark at the moment.

_________________
They are free, yes, but not entirely free; for they have a master, and that master is Law.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Chroma
 Post subject: Blitzkreig
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 12:35 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(Evil and Chaos @ Feb. 10 2008,16:04)
QUOTE
We tried probably ~fourty games with 'no marching to claim, but may contest'.

It worked nicely.

And that was for each objective, including for Defend the Flag and such, or just for Blitz?

Why can they contest if they can't claim, as it's the same "effect" in play: control of the objective?

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Blitzkreig
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 1:46 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
And that was for each objective, including for Defend the Flag and such, or just for Blitz?


Every objective bar BTS.

We found it meant you had to anticipate where you wanted to be in future turns much more, rather than being in a Firefight on one side of the board on turn two, then Tripling in transport vehicles to somewhere ~1 metre away the next turn.


Why can they contest if they can't claim, as it's the same "effect" in play: control of the objective?

Because they're not in the area long enough to establish dominance, but long enough for any enemies also in the area to become cautious and go to ground / ignore the objective and get ready to fight.




_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 2
  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

cron

Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net