Jump to content
Rolling Thunder Forums
Predator

Game 98

Recommended Posts

What we need is new blood. Do we even have enough players to field 80 positions without somebody playing in multiple games?

I like to have at least 2 games active at all times, and am currently signed up for the next 3 starts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know at one point there had to be 5 or 6 games running at once because I was playing 90,91, and 93. I think 94 started before 90 ended. I'm not sure if 89 was still going at that time or not. 93 is about 6 turns from ending with at least 12 people still involved.

I think the special game has slowed down sign ups because there are no ta blocks and the elimination rate in that game seems slower. that is just speculation on my part as I am not in that game. I try to play two games at once which is what I am in now (93,97). However with 93 about to end I am certainly ready to get 98 rolling...I agree that new blood is needed especially since there are players in 93 talking about a break from vic when that game ends. Unfortunately with the video game generation in full swing there are no youths out there willing to challenge their minds. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The special game also brought back some players back into the game.

 

If you want to have a broader appeal, you would have to do more than eliminate some factors from the game like TA's and morale bombardments. New things have to be added and old issues looked into.

And the game should be more easily accessible for beginning players. Like as in a Wiki with tips, tricks and exaples of play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with Dageraad....

 

Potential for a game like victory is limited anyway, as it's a special form of gaming, coming out o the PBM-idea.

It's mainly limited on people from +40, which still know and like the "old way" of gaming ...

And it's probably not very inviting for younger people, as there are so manymanymany other games and concepts available (online-games, playstation, strategy-games on PC, etc.).

 

But in any case, it's very much on Russ to think about how to get new players (or no longer active ones back) into the community... and to initiate such actions.

 

Of course, we all try to bring in new players - if there's a potential candidate at hand...

But i think we all know that the number of such occasions is very limited :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hell, I'm still waiting for Russ to get "Overlord" started!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well game 96 has been interesting and I think the variety gets people interested. I also think it has been a lot more competitive in that the game has not been wrapped up by an alliance. Yes there are groups working together but approaching turn 30 we don't have an alliance rolling up the map. I know in game 94 and 95 everybody had a pretty good idea of what alliance was going to win by turn 30 and those views really haven't changed. It also occurs to me that there are probably some players that have never stayed around for those late tech periods simply because they thought the game was already decided.

 

So I would like to propose another special game. one with advanced tech and start up positions so that the countries would be more customized. Back in the early games of victory you knew very little about an opposing position. This will bring back some of that uncertainty. It also ensures that each country will have some immediate firepower right at the start as I am sure no one would drop before doing their initial builds. So here is what I was thinking but I am sure we can fine tune the approach. It would also depend on this being workable with Russ

 

Game start tech between 25 and 35 with 3 turn sheets. Since some games seam to be decided by turn 30 this keeps the bulk of the game exciting vice decided.

 

Each set up gets 50 population to add but can only be distributed to 3 cities as that would require manual changes to the setups I am sure but it puts a little less certainty on where an opponent will strike. It also provides population to support the starting stockpiles

 

Perhaps a 1000 cp to customize the population increase. Also 5000 arm air ship fuel gen and nun points. Maybe the starting ship arm and air could be customizable at a 200 ship = 25 arm = 30 air points. So if you were playing Switzerland instead of 5000 ship points you could exchange that at start up for 625 arm for example. It would allow nations to customize to their situation for the startup only. We would also need perhaps a 50000 treasury. The result would be a vastly different structure of forces industry and population at the 3rd turn when those forces would clash. Well something to consider but it would sign me up right away

 

 

 

 

And lastly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a "standard"-victory-game, it's normal that sooner or later a group will manoeuver itself into a position where it will become clear that they probably will make it.

I think, that's the normal way and as players / teams go for a victory, all work to reach that point for it's own team.

 

If this point is reached in turn 30, 50 or 60... no one will know at the beginning.

But games which really run into the final stage with a still open situation (let's say from turn 45 or so onwards) are not many i guess.

 

So, special games as an addon to the "standard"-vics (and there are probably many cool ideas) are definitely an idea to bring in new challenges for those who get bored on normal games.

:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I started this thread to encourage people to sign up for the next regular game. Somehow it has turned into a debate for another special game.

:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:-) ... Understood!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've asked all my friends already and there generally are four reasons why they do not play:

- Cost. There are a lot of games that are essentially free to play and even something like WOW or EVE-O (both considered expensive) are much cheaper.

- Investment and learning curve. Victory is hard and not exactly user-friendly. The fact that it is hard has its own appeal. The fact that it is not user-friendly does not. See my earlier post about the lack of on-line help. You can still be a good player, have the bad luck of being surrounded by a hostile premade TA and kicked out of the gave, were you have to wait for half a year for the next try,

- Bugs. From the lack of usefullness of Night Fighters to the TA system to bugs with the intercept system: there are bugs. There are purist wargamers amongst my friends that do not consider joining Victory because of those bugs.

- Time. Succesfull positions take upo a lot of time and not everyone has it.

 

The last years we have had a lot of discussions about new rules, features, setups and ways tro make the game more attractive, but they all fail on the difficulty of implementing them. The NO TA ruie is probably not that hard to implement: just block the PAP TA option.

While game #96 has its appeal we have 22-24 active positions. Game #87 ended (in turn 73) with 20 active positions and a surprise winner, so game 96 is nothing special in the number of active players.

 

I won't participate in #98, as I already have positions in #95, #96 and #97 and that is about the maximum I can manage in my spare time. I do not see any of these positions collapsing before the start of #98.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×