Jump to content
joshuaslater

Alternating Activation

Recommended Posts

We tried this at our last game, and it was fun! At the start of each round, you'd roll off to see who wins intiative, whereby you can go first or tell your opponent to go. After that we alternated turns (edit: units) like in other TTGames and it really didn't hurt the Warlord game.

 

I know the draw deck is one of the coolest parts of the game, but if you're on the losing end where you're opponent gets all his cards drawn first, you're left hoping to get some defensive strikes at best. If their army gets to unload their archers and two spellcasters first before you even get to move, it ain't always fun. For a game with a different flow, we found alternating activation to be better, and I think we'll stick with it. It had more of a wargame feel that we're used to coming from Chronopia.

 

Try it and get back to me.

 

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We tried this at our last game, and it was fun! At the start of each round, you'd roll off to see who wins intiative, whereby you can go first or tell your opponent to go. After that we alternated turns like in other TTGames and it really didn't hurt the Warlord game.

 

I know the draw deck is one of the coolest parts of the game, but if you're on the losing end where you're opponent gets all his cards drawn first, you're left hoping to get some defensive strikes at best. If their army gets to unload their archers and two spellcasters first before you even get to move, it ain't always fun. For a game with a different flow, we found alternating activation to be better, and I think we'll stick with it. It had more of a wargame feel that we're used to coming from Chronopia.

 

Try it and get back to me.

 

Cheers.

 

While I can see a way to still use the Spy SA how do you handle the now useless Tactician SA? Perhaps a +1 on the inititive die for each tactician?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the game we played, we didn't have tactitian models on the board, or if we did, we didn't sweat it. I think a +1 to the die roll sounds excellent, or using it as a "pass" to make your opponent activate first when you want to bait them into some cunning plan you've devised.

 

We were playing 1500 points, and like I said, it made the game even more fun. When people give it a basic run through, I'd like to hear their opinion on how their games played.

 

It so far is just what we did "in house", so whatever remedy you feel is cool for Tactitian, run with it. I think the +1 is a decided advantage in a d10 game, and would reflect a model having sound tactical experience.

Rock on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I think the unpredictability of using cards is a great feature. I would argue to the bitter end against the traditional I go-You go initiative. Not knowing how the initiative is going to fall can really affect your choice of tactics, which in my opinion is closer to reality.

 

That being said, if your group wants to do it a different way I don't care a lick......It's your club and you shoud have the right to tweak things.

 

Castlebuilder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alternating unit activation! Not whole army you go, I go! I suppose I could have been a lot clearer on that.

I understood that you meant by troop. How would you handle somebody with a bunch of troops compared to another player with only a couple? Say for example, I have a Reven force with 7 troops against a Crusader troop that has only 3?

 

Castlebuilder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alternating unit activation! Not whole army you go, I go! I suppose I could have been a lot clearer on that.

I understood that you meant by troop. How would you handle somebody with a bunch of troops compared to another player with only a couple? Say for example, I have a Reven force with 7 troops against a Crusader troop that has only 3?

 

Castlebuilder

 

The way I've seen it in the past in other games besides alternate for three then a whole lot of Reven going was, depending on who won the initiative, Crusader - 2 Reven - Crusader - 2 Reven - Crusader - 3 Reven, or 2 Reven - Crusader - 2 Reven - Crusader - 3 Reven - Crusader. The side that had the most troops could always shift when the odd troop/s moved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, I will just have to agree with CB. I can appreciate anyone who wants to play by some house rules so that their group can enjoy the game the way they want... But, I like the rules the way they are...

 

I have had my butt handed to me several times because of unfortunate initiatives. But, I have also dealt a few butt kickings out for that same reason too.

 

I agree that with either choice it can make for a huge difference in both force compilation as well as tactics and move choices...

 

So, summary, to each their own.. glad you guys found a way to enjoy the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose it's possible to have points distributed like that, with one player having smaller units and thus more activations. After the Crusader player has finished with his three troops (whether he went first or not), then the Reven player would finish his remaining units. It comes down to this arrangement any way you play it as units are removed from the board. Cards are pulled from the draw deck anyway, so you still could have either player activating all their troops first. Assuming you're playing the same points, and all things being equal, alternating activation is still viable, even with a discrepancy in number of units. How many smaller troops are you going to be able to bring to bear against the three Crusader units anyway?

 

We've come to Warlord from Chronopia, and seen different combinations like what you're talking about. Large units versus smaller ones and more activations. Sometimes it pays off to have more activations, and other times a larger unit is advantageous. Playing style accounts for a lot, but as long as the points are equal, the player that has units remaining simply finishes activating them until the turn is over.

 

We split the table and played two 1500 point games. Both games had about the same number of activations, but we'll have to test the scenario you've laid out.

 

Better yet, give it a try yourself, as our next meeting won't be 'til September. Let us know how it flows, and if you like it better or worse than the draw deck.

 

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would agree with Tim and Jason on this; the random unpredictability of battle is a tactical aspect of the game. Sometimes you get hurt by it, sometimes you get to use it to your advantage. I can think of several army builds where I could produce a greater number of troops than an opponent, and turn it into a huge tactical advantage, just by knowing how the activations will fall ahead of time.

 

But if it works for you, knock yourself out. I do think alternating activations is a great way to run small demo forces though.

 

~v

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's plenty of tactics in alternating activation. So you win initiative. Do you activate the troop in close combat already, use a solo spellcaster to launch a fireball, or manoever another unit? Especially when you know your opponent alternates with you. It's a different tactical aspect, and most definitely is derived from our love for Chronopia, but admittedly, Warlord doesn't have things like the Wait action to allow for countercharges and interrupting an opponents present turn.

 

All comparisons aside, I'd like to hear some of you hardcore Warlord fans take on this after giving it a go. I understand your reticence to change the game as you know and love it, but having played both styles, I can say alternating activation is a neat twist from the draw deck, and it was a great afternoon. I haven't talked to the crew yet about September's games, but I'd bet we continue with what we're doing. It was fun.

 

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, that is one way to reduce the element of chance in the game.

 

Now if you wanted to go in the opposite direction and add an obscene amount of luck to the game, only draw two cards per turn before moving to the end phase (only two troop activations then reshuffle all of the cards!) You might never get a troop activation all game! (However, I don't know how you would handle those pesky Spectral Minions; they shouldn't be able to activate at the end of every turn in this format. Maybe they can just be activated like a normal troop.)

 

Rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Josh,

 

I'm playing the devils advocate here, so don't think that I'm really bent at your ideas or anything. They honestly do have merit. I'm just trying to argue the counter point in support of using cards.

 

That being said, if you think I would let the initiative be one of your units to one of mine until you were done, then all that remained of mine, I would have serious issues with that. Another point; Say that due to me having a bunch of small troops, I have two (or more) troops moving on the same activation. They choose to attack the same enemy troop. By the rules, you get a defensive strike against each troop that attacks you. I would make the counter argument, however, that you should only get one per activation. Your group will need to answer that to make alternating initiative work.

 

You are correct that there are "plenty of tactics in alternating activation", but knowing for certain that you will only move one troop before I get to move my next one is a huge factor. An experienced player can really use that knowledge to affect his strategy. With pulling cards the best he can do is play the odds and hope fate doesn't burn him.

 

I am pretty much dead set on using cards, so unless another player in my group insists on trying alernating initiative I doubt it will happen. Yes, I'm being closed minded, but that is because I've already decided, not because I'm afraid of new ideas.

 

I do like your point about units being able to overwatch/brace for attack or countercharge, etc. I would like to see that included in Warlord somehow. Maybe we should start a new thread to discuss that?

 

Castlebuilder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the big problems with using an initiative deck is that in smaller games, it's hard to give a good shuffle to 5 or 6 cards total. A very easy fix is to get marbles, stones, or dice of different colors for each army and toss them in a bag and shake it up. Each marble, stone, die, etc drawn is a troop activating. You'll have a much more random draw since you don't have to worry about cards clumping when you shuffle or a bad shuffle keeping the activation order similar to the previous turn.

 

Part of the draw to the game for me is that is not UGOIGO. There is that very realistic threat of a double or greater activation. It is very frustrating when the cards do not come out in your favor. I've been on the receiving end of my opponent getting 4 of 5 troops in a row. It happens. I've had a number of occasions where I have had a similar luxury. Part of the strategy of the game is manipulating the initiative deck for advantage either with Tacticians or more troops. I also like when my opponents have a troop advantage over me. I usually get to deploy and act last in the first turn, and then when the fighting starts, I get to turn one of my bigger troops to eat a small one. Poof, the card advantages start to disappear.

 

Of course, House Rules are perfectly acceptible if your local players are okay with it. Eliminating the UGOIGO however is one of the big components of the game and something that makes Warlord different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Castlebuilder--Devil's Advocate is fine by me, and I usually play the same role on any games forum too. I like the Warlord forum because I've seen actual rules discussion without flame wars and juvenile behavior. I'll put up another post detailing why I'm lukewarm about Warlord, detailing more than the draw deck.

@Qwyk--I don't know ya, but I feel like I can call you Qwyk as you've answered many queries I've had, and I trust your judgement. My group has used the colored beads instead of the cards for precisely the same reasons you stated. It worked much better than cards. I see the point of having a tactician on the board, or smaller units to change your odds of getting a draw, and I will play comfortably with either system. Our decision that day to try something different came about from, I'm guessing, laziness as much as anything else, but what we found was that we had fun. I know every gamer knows that that's why we play these games.

 

At any rate, if someone gives alternating activation a go, post your findings; it could become an optional house rule for people wanting the "you go, I go", or at least provide concrete insight for a review.

 

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...