The official MYTHIC BATTLES: PANTHEON message board.
 
HomeCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Beta version 2.3

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2
AuthorMessage
Voice of Olympus
Herald
avatar

Posts : 382
Join date : 2016-12-29

PostSubject: Re: Beta version 2.3   4th January 2017, 12:00 pm

@Pseudonyme - it's not your diagrams that make my head hurt, but the idea of having to follow them just to pick an army. When we played the demo game for Tric Trac we got very confused several times trying to follow this odd sequence. Round the table (in either direction) would have been far easier.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Biel
Spartan


Posts : 108
Join date : 2016-12-29

PostSubject: Re: Beta version 2.3   4th January 2017, 1:40 pm

Biel wrote:
6. Setting up a Game : wich player chooses first the side where he will deploy his army ?
Voice of Olympus wrote:
In most scenarios the armies start off table, so there is no deployment order necessary. The lead player takes the first turn and moves on whatever units he wants.
I may have wrongly translated my question. Maybe : During the Setting up a game sequence, when and in wich order players choose their zone of deployment ?

Voice of Olympus wrote:
@Peps: a good question about activating the same allied unit twice. Currently there's nothing stopping you. If you could pull it off, that might be another of those instances which you'd talk about for centuries Smile
Not possible in the Rulebook v20g (the one in PnP), p.14, bottom of the first column : "It’s not possible to activate the same Unit twice in a given turn."
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Pseudonyme
Villager
avatar

Posts : 88
Join date : 2016-12-29
Location : Paris

PostSubject: Re: Beta version 2.3   4th January 2017, 2:08 pm

Voice of Olympus wrote:
@Pseudonyme - it's not your diagrams that make my head hurt, but the idea of having to follow them just to pick an army. When we played the demo game for Tric Trac we got very confused several times trying to follow this odd sequence. Round the table (in either direction) would have been far easier.
Ok, but I think the Z sequence is better for 2v2 as it allows each team to have a draft alternatively.
In fact, It's not a matter of "table disposition" but more of who is in which team, in a 2v2 game, I think it's important that each team do a draft alternatively, so that each player can react to the unit the oether team has just drafted.

For exemple, if you take my last 4 player free for all draft sequence, if you consider that the players of each team is accros the table, it has the same result as the Z sequence from a team draft point of view.

I hope I am clear. I updated my diagrams at h-t-t-p-:-/-/cpc.cx/i7W to be more clear on the 2v2 drafting sequence


PS: It's weird because the last time I tried, I could not post this image
PS2: We should replace the smileys by Leo, QW, Benoit and Erwan smiling and frowning faces Smile


Last edited by Pseudonyme on 4th January 2017, 2:17 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Peps
Villager
avatar

Posts : 82
Join date : 2016-12-31
Age : 41
Location : South of France

PostSubject: Re: Beta version 2.3   4th January 2017, 2:12 pm

Voice of Olympus wrote:
@Peps: a good question about activating the same allied unit twice. Currently there's nothing stopping you. If you could pull it off, that might be another of those instances which you'd talk about for centuries Smile

I do agree ! Very Happy

Voice of Olympus wrote:
I think the core recruitment will be used a fair amount. Certainly it seems useful to have a normal version, on which other versions can be based.

I'd much rather explain the core of the rules in the main book and just have to explain what was different, than have to repeat the whole thing in every scenario.

We can always reduce it later if we find it redundant.

I understand that point.
But I think it would be clearer to explain how to recruit an army (draft X RP per army, no more than one divinity per army) in the core rules, and how the draft is processed in each scenario.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
RichC
Villager
avatar

Posts : 25
Join date : 2016-12-29

PostSubject: Re: Beta version 2.3   4th January 2017, 4:24 pm

A few more suggestions around turn order.
Under Limit of activations I would add a line saying each unit may only be activated one time in a turn sequence.


I like the improved Action Phases they are cleaner now. I would suggest that in the action phase that you could make it a little easier to follow by doing the following.

1. Same
2. Same
3. Decide to take a Simple or Complex action with the unit.

Simple Action:
a. Resolve any powers that occur at the start of the units activation.
b. Resolve0-2 different simple actions with that unit.
c. Resolve any powers that occur at the end of the unit’s activation

Complex Action
a. Resolve 1 complex action with that unit.
b. A unit that is taking a complex action is treated as having no talents and only powers described as detriments during their activation.

I am focusing on the organization again over the wording. The hope is that by cleanly organizing the flow it can run top to bottom without the “go to’s”.


Question: Under Recruit an Army
3) is this meant to go clockwise as before or does it now go counter clockwise? Somewhat unclear from the rules seems to indicate clockwise but I from a previous discussion during the campaign I was under the impression it would be counter clockwise.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Teowulff
Villager
avatar

Posts : 81
Join date : 2016-12-29
Location : Netherlands

PostSubject: Re: Beta version 2.3   4th January 2017, 6:39 pm

Perhaps rename "Sneak Attack" to "Ambush"? :-)
Back to top Go down
View user profile
bubblewrap
Villager


Posts : 4
Join date : 2016-12-31
Location : Greece

PostSubject: Re: Beta version 2.3   5th January 2017, 2:43 pm

A few suggestions for 2.3 from my part:

1. "If the explanation is too long for this summary, the entry lists the key points and refers you to the appropriate page for the full rules." Shorten this to: For more detailed explanations see the relevant page of the rulebook where appropriate.

2. Under the keyword "owned/owner" clarify whether "owner" and all derivatives are interchangeable with "control" and all derivatives. If this is not the case, then perhaps "control" needs an entry here? In the last sentence, perhaps simplify by referring to physical ownership versus control/ownership during a battle/game.

3. Under "Token" perhaps it is necessary to state where to place tokens when affecting enemies with the relevant power. For example: place the token onto the affected unit's dashboard or next to the affected model/figure on the game map.

4. Should there be a keyword for "model/figure/miniature"? or perhaps a clarification under "unit"? instead of "game element" refer to model/figure? Perhaps clarify here (as you do in the set-up section) that models/figures of trees/columns and so on are not units or game elements, but terrain elements?

5. I am still thinking about rules hierarchy. Perhaps the player with the most absorbed omphaloi (Greek plural for 'omphalos') wins tie breaks? This adds some small tactical value to the omphaloi. I am still thinking about how to resolve it in case no player has absorbed one yet. I'll get back to you on this.

6. Superb job on everything else!!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Voice of Olympus
Herald
avatar

Posts : 382
Join date : 2016-12-29

PostSubject: Re: Beta version 2.3   5th January 2017, 4:09 pm

Powers - Regardless of the actual effect of "those things that units have which allow them to do stuff that tends to break the rules or enhance their existing stats and simple actions", we need a simple term to describe them all. Power works fine for me.

I've changed detrimental to permanent as it's more flexible.

I can't currently think of a rule that needs more than these two terms.

Activations, and one-in-a-million combos - I've put in a general 1 activation per unit per turn clause to stop the only abuse I think is even slightly doable.

Recruiting sequence - I've made some changes.

French beta - after some discussion we're going to put this up earlier than I previously mentioned (next few days). I'm not entirely sure this is a good idea because I think we may just introduce some confusion, but we shall see. Can't find out without trying Smile

@Ken - I think the first sentence of the Mighty Throw definition makes it clear that damage will occur as usual.

@skies - I don't see your confusion over Sneak Attack.

"This unit gains +1 Offence as long as a friendly unit is in the same area."

The subject is "this unit", so "the same area" refers to the area with that unit in, not the area of a target that isn't even mentioned Smile

@Biel - the order of choosing deployment/entry areas is determined by the scenario. In many cases that is fixed, based on the sides chosen.

@Pseudonyme - I agree that the result needs to be that each team drafts alternately. I just think that the simplest way to define that is to go around the table and require teams to sit alternately.

By the way, I do quite like your diagrams, though I am slightly concerned that poor old red seems so unhappy all the time.

@Rich C - Your suggestion is similar to what I had before, and which results in an additional level of nesting. Not wrong, just a different way ot presenting it. I'm not convinced it's any great deal less or more clear. What i do think will be easier is when we get this laid out nicely and I can do a turn flowchart Smile

@Teowulff - we've used Ambush for a Power already Smile

@bubblewrap - Control isn't a game term. I've changed the owner definition.

Tokens. Still work to be done on this topic. There are many permutations for token use and placement, and I may add a longer section on general token use. If so, this may be updated at that point.

Model/figure/miniature. I've tried to use only miniature for clarity. Added this.

The problem with the omphaloi tie break, is that it only breaks some ties, so we still have the same problem. Currently my suggestion of active player hasn't really been beaten. It isn't ideal, but does provide a simple and 100% effective resolution in a single step. The aim is to let people get on with the game, and so whatever we use needs to be simple, fast, and always give a clear answer. Remember, whatever system is used, exactly the same number of players won't get their way!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Beta version 2.3   

Back to top Go down
 
Beta version 2.3
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 2Go to page : Previous  1, 2
 Similar topics
-
» Version Select Kouki Aero w/ Kouki wing
» Beta 400RR for sale - £2500
» TEAMSPEAK Beta 17
» Mobile version needs work
» Callaway Diablo Edge Tour Version Driver for Beginner/High Handicapper

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
A GOOD PLACE :: Mythic Battles: Pantheon :: Gameplay-
Jump to: