NotOneStepBack
Posts: 915
Joined: 6/17/2011
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JocMeister
quote:
ORIGINAL: Seminole
quote:
You don´t (for good reason) apply penalties like that because its creates anger, frustration and resentment with the players.
What does it create for the player it is rewarding?
This strikes me as more of a glass half full/half empty perception issue. Not saying that doesn't make it an issue for the glass half empty crowd, but that honestly doesn't enter my estimation of the value or utility of the rule in question.
If the campaign had one VP total for each player, instead of the 'tug of war' over a single VP total, would that change this perceptually for you? If Germany was 'rewarded' 1000 points for containing the Allies a certain amount by a certain date, and there was no 'penalty' to the Allied player (aside from seeing Germany get points they could have prevented with more able play), do you still get angry, frustrated and filled with resentment?
It's only in seeing games play out that we can see how these rules fit into the balance of points. People seem more interested in guessing the outcomes than getting to the outcomes.
I ask again, is 10 hexes by July 1 really that hard a bar to reach? It's intended to put pressure on the WA player to not sit on his hands, and to induce and reward the German player for stuffing the Allied player instead of hiding beyond the Seigfried Wall.
To those who seek to secure 10 hexes and then sit on their hands. Go ahead, let's see how that works out, although I have to wonder why people interested in doing that bought this game in the first place...
Again I think you miss my point. I would be just as unhappy with a 1000 VP German reward just as I am with the German Garrison penalty. Don´t put in a game deciding penalty like that. For any side.
And yes, getting 10 hexes before July the 1st is actually very hard to do. Weather limits you to when you can land and by the time you can actually land in good weather you will only have 3-4 turns to grab 10 hexes. Which against a competent German player is very, very, very hard... Against Pelton I actually landed 1-2 weeks before the historical landing. I landed as soon as I got clear weather. But I was later hit with 2 weeks of rain in late June which ruined any chance of getting the last two hexes needed. So a game undone for two persons by 2 weeks of bad weather and 2 hexes. That is just stupid and poor game design.
Same thing with Garrisons. A single slip of the finger (accidently moving a unit or whatever) can cost you as much as 3 months of Allied bombings. Its silly. Clumsy and silly.
I respect your opinion but I think you are missing the big picture here just as the developers are. I´m not talking about VP balance here at all. Its a GAME. Its supposed to be fun and rewarding to play and not an exercise in frustration and battling rules that and are clumsy and harshly implemented. This has been my point pretty much from day 1 and it still is.
If I´m completely wrong and the devs got everything right why is the game already fading from interest? But I guess we reached kind of a dead end with our discussion. Clearly we are in different camps. 
As I said to Red Lancer I´ll be more then happy if I´m wrong and this game will be a great success with a active and long lived community. But I still bet I´m not and after summer only very few people will still be playing. I think we will see some smaller modules added shortly that will be very expensive without adding much to the game. They will sell extremely poorly and the devs will quickly be back to WitE 2.0 and never get back to the Western Front.
I´ll buy you a beer if I´m wrong.
This is what gets me the most. I had 450 VPs in the black on Meklore and I decided to invade early in order to secure my 10 hexes. It was stupid and I should've waited until Spring, but I figured I was well ahead in the game and I had a fully prepped invasion force at 90 prep points, fully rested air force and clear skies for a few turns.
It ended up in disaster and I can't try a new invasion before the 1000 vp penalty, so I have resigned the game in disgust. Was it my own stupid fault? Yes. But we didn't finish the game because it doesn't make sense to put another month into it when it's decided by July 1 '44. Nor does it make sense that a TOE change in that game gave me over 150 VPs due to garrisons.
Axis players are also getting smarter as are Allied players. I figured out how to get bombing Vps in '43 to set up 44. Axis players have figured out how to keep strike forces on rails to combat any invasion. We are in an arms race of gimmicky tactics now to beat each other.
I am getting more frustrated with the campaign and have switched over to scenario play for the time.
< Message edited by NotOneStepBack -- 3/17/2015 2:47:37 PM >
|
Printable Version
RE: Shearing the Sheep! - JocMeister(WA) vs. Meklore61(Ax) - 
I think I made the right decision to hold off on buying the game...I haven't rule it out, but I am quite content to wait until next Thanksgiving for a sale hopefully. 
Decides the game. They could just as well have slapped a "game over" sign for the WAs. It doesn´t take anything into consideration. It gives the player no "way out". A proper game doesn´t do that to two players who have invested months into a game. Its just amateurish game design. 
9 hexes instead of 10. -1000 VPs. Really? 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread