|
Post by JohnnyDangerous on Nov 26, 2012 1:05:01 GMT -5
Yah, the mandatory all reserves situation is a bit over the top. I feel like it has been very limiting to variety of list generation, gives the defender a huge advantage, and frankly has been very challenging.
The other thing talked about was the option to bow out of a three way game, possibly going after another territory, even that same round, delaying the attack until the two other parties have fought a battle, or getting a bonus attack added to the attacks the next round.
Also, with the defender getting so many advantages, possibly one less if Servo's suggestion is voted upon, I was thinking that ties should be decided by moral victory. I mean if a person sets up terrain, chooses the mission, chooses deployment zones, and can choose an army tailored to defend the attack... I would think they should be in a good position to win by moral victory. By letting the defender auto-win ties it seems a bit unsportsman like.
Yes the above seemed to make sense from a real life military point of view when designed... Lets face it, this is not a real military simulation... If it were a bit more realistic spies and/or scouts would at least know what the deployment and mission would be so that a force capable of performing the task would be chosen.... but that seems unrealistic for game purposes...
Anyway, just a couple ideas after playing this round... Any ideas as to when we can meet to discuss the next round? I know of at least 1 game which needs to be played... are there any others?
|
|