|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 9/23/2008
Posts: 1,487
Location: Lower the Hutt, New Zealand
|
gholli69 wrote:Couldn't this lead to abuse by locking yourself inside gambit? It could. Very good observation! I try and teach all my players that you need to build your squad in such a way that you can pretty much guarantee that you can get to the middle. If you are bringing Satchel Charge or the like, know the doors you need to blow and make sure you protect the way so that you can. If you've got Override or the like, make sure you protect them enough so that you can get into the middle. I completely agree with the idea that the goal is to kill all of your opponents pieces - that is what I try and teach my students! - but the presence of gambit adjusts that. I do like the ideas of either gambit not counting if you both have it, or the 5pt each thingee.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/29/2008
Posts: 1,783
Location: Canada
|
gholli69 wrote:Couldn't this lead to abuse by locking yourself inside gambit? Yes, it could. But that's no different than how things work currently. How it would play out really depends on the map. Is the gambit zone entirely contained within one lockable room (ala Rebel Fortress or Theed Palace)? Or is the gambit zone divided into separate locations by doors and walls (ala Cloud City)? If anything, the gambit system I'm suggesting would simply slow the points-gain from such tactics on some maps, while it would change nothing on other maps. So it brings a positive end result, even in the case of a gambit-lock-in.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 5/3/2014
Posts: 2,098
|
I think the following rules would stop the abuse of Gambit and encourage engaging. The idea is getting a base score for winning or losing and getting rewarded for proof of engaging.
2 pts for winning.
+1 point if the difference between your Gambit score is 75 or greater.
+1 point if you score 150 or more Gambit
+1 point if you defeat all members of the opposing army
0 points for losing
+1 if the difference between your Gambit score is 25 or less
+1 if you score 150 Gambit or more
Gambit should be awarded at the end of each round in the following way
+5 Gambit if a piece worth 10 or more is in Gambit
-5 Gambit if a piece worth 10 or more is in the Starting Area.
if you win 100-87 than the winner gets 2 and the loser gets 1 pts
if you win 170-55 the winner gets 3 pts and the loser gets 0 pts
If you win 170-155 the winner gets 3 pts and the loser gets 2 pts
If you win 215-155 and you destroyed all the opponents army the winner gets 4 pts and the loser gets 1 pt
If you win 125-42 the winner gets 3 pts and the loser gets 0 pts
But I would do scoring based off this premise.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 9/1/2008
Posts: 818
Location: Wisconsin
|
So ... did everyone hope the topic would go away? Shall we change it?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/19/2010
Posts: 1,291
|
Why not change the gambit zone?
Player A has to be in X position on player Bs side.
Player B has to be in Y position on player As side.
Engagement is encouraged. Your still rewarded for getting gambit, and if your opponent wants to stop you, they don't have to over commit.
Win, win, win.
Back to top
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/9/2008
Posts: 4,729
Location: Chicago
|
Chargers wrote:So ... did everyone hope the topic would go away? Shall we change it?
Yes, we need to change it. We will return to this topic with heavy focus after Gen Con
|
|
|
Guest |