Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

337Struggle of Empires - house rules

Expand Messages
  • Neil Parker
    Sep 12, 2007

      Well i agree with the Army training view - you can only get the potential benefit of +1 combat if you actually have at least one army present. So a player with one army in a territory with one AT tile would get the +1 bonus vs a player with no armies but with two AT tiles (which then don't count because there is no army to benefit from them).

      As for balance, i agree that overall i don't mind slight differences in balance in games (particularly if they are themed), but in this case the balance issue is arbitrary and can easily be resolved.

      --- In lbgc@..., "Marty M" <martymoller@...> wrote:
      > As one of the two newbies playing on Sunday, I thought I'd throw in my
      > impressions of and thoughts on the game.
      > Overall, I enjoyed this game a lot. I got off to a dreadful start,
      > putting all my eggs in two baskets (is that a new figure of speech?) -
      > namely the German States and the Caribbean. This was based mainly on my
      > starting position, but I really should have spread myself more thinly at
      > the start. Bob managed to kick me out of the Caribbean within a couple
      > of rounds, so I ended the first war in last place and really without any
      > hope of significant recovery. A real stinker of a start. [:-&]
      > Having said that, although I never had a hope of recovery I really
      > enjoyed the game, and the afternoon was great fun as usual at LBGC.
      > Regarding the suggested rule change re free movement in Europe, I
      > disagree. I don't mind that some games aren't perfectly balanced -
      > Diplomacy <http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/483> and Friedrich
      > <http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/12891> are two examples of
      > unbalanced multiplayer games, and most of the scenarios in Memoir '44
      > <http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/10630> are unbalanced. Personally, I
      > don't really mind this, particularly if there is opportunity for
      > repeated plays - as there is in LBGC. I think it can make for
      > interesting play, and winning a game with the weakest side is great.
      > Regarding Bob's interpretation of the Army Training rule, this is the
      > way I would view it too, but I haven't read the rules for myself.
      > As I say, I enjoyed Struggle of Empires. I do think it lasted slightly
      > too long, and I think I prefer Imperial
      > <http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/24181> , but this view is based on a
      > single playing of each game. And I won my game of Imperial. [B-)]
      > Once again, a great afternoon at LBGC. I hadn't been able to attend for
      > several months over the summer, but have been able to go twice in recent
      > weeks. Thanks again to Bob for being a great host, and I look forward to
      > losing dismally at another game soon.

    • Show all 4 messages in this topic