Skip to content

Campaign Games, part three.

May 30, 2011

There are two things that many people have yearned for in relation to Mechaton, one is a variety of unit sizes and types, and the other is a point system to make them “fair and balanced.”  To see evidence of this just follow these links.

My first post.

Chassis.

Attacks of Opportunity.

Mechaton: Hijacked
Mechaton: Advancer Phalanx

The problem with a straight point system under the current version of the rules is that it would clash with the victory point system.  Joshua A.C. Newman said it very well when he said that a point system “removes the asymmetrical nature of the fight. My two guys struggling against your 5 with a very real chance of winning, that’s pretty awesome.”

When I described, in part one, the three players placing six groups of mechs on the map by writing down the hex locations of each, what I failed to mention was the size distribution of these six groups.  If each player starts with twenty mechs then they each place two groups each of five, three, and two mechs.  If the starting number of mechs is thirty, then they each place two groups each of seven, five, and three mechs.

This preserves the first half of the secrecy of the build phase.  The second half is preserved by giving each player a pool of attachments to draw from.  This pool is three times the number of the mechs they started the game with.  So if they start with twenty mechs each, then they each have sixty attachments to use.  If the number of mechs is thirty then the number of attachments is ninety.  The number of mechs in a given hex will be known to all players after the initial “blind” placement, but each player may decide on the number of attachments those mechs are carrying right before each battle.

End of part three.

Advertisements
2 Comments leave one →
  1. ShaunGamer permalink
    June 1, 2011 11:00 pm

    I really liked the ideas you had for the campaign system in parts 1 & 2 but couldn’t see how that would fit in with the victory rules from the basic game. Your solution above is well thought out and has sold me on doing a campaign now.

    Do you choose the type of attachments before the campaign (you have a preset pool of attachments to choose from for each Battle) or do you just make them up on the fly before each battle?

    • June 1, 2011 11:55 pm

      I thought a pool of generic attachements would be the most simple thing to keep track of turn to turn. Of course the players involved can decide before the campaign, on what level of complexity they are comfortable with.

      I’m glad you like my ideas so far.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: