Campaign question

Greg Smith said:
A player may ultimately be forced to not send any forces. If a player wins and decides to attack target X, only to find the other players attack his targets Y & Z, he may decide defending Y&Z is a more sensible option.

Well that brings a question, it seems that you know what your opponents will do before fighting.
Maybe we misunderstood the rule but when a player declares an attack we resolve the fight and then the next player decides what to do.
So if you attack X when you discover Y is attacked you've already fought so you're having less options. And when Z is attacked it's the same you've got less and less ships.
(playing this way that's why we allow a "pass" option so the player with the best init may play last waiting for others actions)
 
we dont, makes it too easy to allocate forces then.
if you do it in order as stated in campaign you could find yourself lacking ships at an important battle, instead you have to think, how many battles have i got, which are important. this means you could make sacrifices earlier on. if you know all your battles then theres no need for sacrifices and it also takes away a tactical element of campaigns.
 
katadder said:
because in theory a person isnt out until lost all his ships. our narn player had no territory left, had limited ships and basically wouldnt fight and so was getting 10RR per turn, plus 1xp dice per ship he turned up and fled with.

I would say that is acceptable stratagy upto a point, but if it goes on just get a large wet halibut and slap the narn player round the head with it till he starts playing the game again, or leaves the campaign.
 
So unless for the first turns where it's obvious (neutral worlds), what's is good in winning the initiative ?
I mean if you win you decide to attack then see you are attacked twice, since everyone knows everything before the battles occur every player can decide how he split his forces.
Winning the init just allows you to be the first one to resolve your battle, right ?
 
katadder said:
because in theory a person isnt out until lost all his ships. our narn player had no territory left, had limited ships and basically wouldnt fight and so was getting 10RR per turn, plus 1xp dice per ship he turned up and fled with.
Then I suggest a house rule, if someone has no strategic targets they don't get the 10RR.
 
the easier house rule is that they hve to bring at least 1pt of the game size (unless used them all earlier) and can only flee via hyperspace :)
that way you have a chance to whittle someone down. and usualy if you can shoot the ship it costs them more than the 10RR to replace anyway.
 
well we did give them the option of counting as losing for campaign purposes but to save ships they can play a flee to the jump gate scenario.
 
Burger said:
Thats not very fair on races whose ships don't have jump point as a common trait.

You could say that ships that flee of the table edge and don't have jump points will take longer to get home... on a 2+ they get home for the next turn, but if you roll a 1 they miss the next turn.
 
katadder said:
if you do it in order as stated in campaign

Ifyou read SFoS, page 188, (Fight Battles) it says:

Once it has been decided who is fighting who and which scenarios are being used, it is time to hit the tabletop and begin playing.

Also the sequence of the campaign turn and the 'Select Targets' section in no way suggest that battles are fought between target selection.
 
yep choose all targets before. but when it comes down to games you wont know the PLs and game size or mission until each game.
 
yup, always how we read it, would be pretty harsh if you didn't. but then I think the campaign rules need a big overhaul anyway!
 
Greg Smith said:
It does say:

Once it has been decided who is fighting who and which scenarios are being used,

Which I infer means you can figure everything out first.

you originally quoted page 188 but try starting at page 187 on the generate scenario. this is doen befor emoving onto the next one.

your qoute that i have added here could mean as in who is fighting who on waht scenarios for 1st battle.

and like i say knowing what all the battles are for a turn completely throws the campaign tactics out the window. if you dont know what missions or size mission you are fighting after your 1st battle it makes you think more.
 
How we do it, is roll initative. Then each persons writes down where they are attacking and make a list, then take it from there.
 
katadder said:
if you dont know what missions or size mission you are fighting after your 1st battle it makes you think more.
Not really. If you know what battles you are fighting, it makes you think more. If you don't know, it makes you guess more.

Thinking > guessing IMO.
 
if you know the battles and scenario size there is less thinking cos you know what to prepare for.
if you dont know the battles and scenarios you have to think about what to commit to each battle as you come to it.
 
You seem to be confusing "thinking" with "guessing".

Think: Thought or thinking is a mental process which allows beings to model the world, and so to deal with it effectively according to their goals, plans, ends and desires.
Guess: an estimate based on little or no information.

Replace "think" with "guess" in your post, and it makes a lot more sense.
 
nope cos i am saying you have say 3 battles. that you know.
now the 1st battle is a 4 point battle lets say. you have to think what to use, and consider what may be needed for later on.
no guessing what to use there - perhaps you just put your fleet roster on a wall and throw darts at it, but the rest of us think about what to use in a scenario by scenario case.
 
Back
Top