337Struggle of Empires - house rules
- 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.
- << Previous post in topic