Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Having played a couple Barbarossa games and currently reading the Annual 98, it seems clear that, especially in the global scenarios, a good player with mop the floor with a clueless noob. I'm curious what sort of handicapping was used with the board game

quote:

ORIGINAL: LiquidSky

The game is self-handicapping as you are supposed to bid for countries. WiF is not really a two player game, and a rather poor solitaire game.

The bidding is based on numbers of Victory cities required for winning. As a fun result, there is usually allied 'friction' between the Germans/Italians and USA/CW. Friction that is sadly missing in a solitaire/2 player game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Having played a couple Barbarossa games and currently reading the Annual 98, it seems clear that, especially in the global scenarios, a good player with mop the floor with a clueless noob. I'm curious what sort of handicapping was used with the board game, which of those are envisioned for inclusion in MWiF, and whether any new balance mechanisms are being contemplated.

I've seen references to tweaking resource levels, Victory Point levels, maybe a few others, but I was wondering whether players have considered giving weaker layers an additional action or two (in other words, in a land action, give the weaker player +1 rail and +1 air actions, etc.). Seems like this might be more useful to new players than a few more resources? Could also work for the AI...