Jeff White
United States
Kyle
Texas
-
I've been thinking of a way to play Manoeuvre with multiple players. Any thoughts or suggestions on the following idea would be great.
GAME START
Randomly place nine map tiles down in a 3X3 grid:
+--+--+--+
| x | A | x |
+--+--+--+
| D | z | B |
+--+--+--+
| x | C | x |
+--+--+--+
Players dice off for army selection, then in opposite order choose their starting tile (A, B, C, or D). A player may place their 8 units in any square on their starting tile.
First player for the first turn is the player who chose their army last, give them the 'first player' marker. Then play proceeds in clockwise order.
GAMEPLAY CHANGES
At the end of the first turn, the 'first player' marker is passed to the player on the left so a different player starts each turn (kind of like the blind token in poker).
All players may move three units (like Advance to Contact) during the first two turns of the game.
During the movement phase, a player may discard a unit card in hand to give that unit an extra 3 movements (terrain may reduce/stop this) _if_ that unit's entire movement is in an 'x' tile.
(*** I would like some suggestions here. Basically, looking to assist movement through the 'open' (x) tiles to facilitate side attacks on starting tiles while not slowing the game down to a crawl. That plus, not being worried about fire in the main contested 'z' tile I see troops willing to sack up and go double time through the 'x' tiles. ***)
END GAME
The game goes until two players exhaust their decks, so only playing until the nightfall condition. (maybe this should be three players exhausting their decks?)
To score the game, grant two points for each unit or space the unit controls in the central 'z' tile _or_ in an opponent's starting tile.
Thoughts?
-
Rick
United States
Burnsville
Minnesota
-
Maybe:
"If a player starts and ends their movement in one of the corner tiles, they get 1/2/x extra spaces of movement"?
My thoughts: There's no need to turn Manoeuvre into a 4 player game. There are plenty of other games I'd rather play 4p. But if I did, it would be a team game. Two armies per side 2x4 grid of tiles and most normal rules apply except leaders can add in all friendly units.
-
Captain Planet
Canada
Montreal
QC
-
In addition to team play, I would add the victory condition that the teammate with the most enemy territory influenced at nightfall or the one who forces the major victory by most enemy units killed wins out of two.
-
Jeff White
United States
Kyle
Texas
-
RiffRaff14 wrote: Maybe:
"If a player starts and ends their movement in one of the corner tiles, they get 1/2/x extra spaces of movement"?
Helpful and something to play around with.
RiffRaff14 wrote:
My thoughts: There's no need to turn Manoeuvre into a 4 player game. There are plenty of other games I'd rather play 4p.
Not helpful.
RiffRaff14 wrote:
But if I did, it would be a team game. Two armies per side 2x4 grid of tiles and most normal rules apply except leaders can add in all friendly units.
Team game is easy to set-up. Looking for a free for all.
-
Jan Ozimek
Denmark
Aalborg
Must resist M:tG. Boardgames are my methadone :)
-
There was a long thread on this subject a while ago. I think it resulted in a pretty decent rules set. You should probably look it up.
-
Rick
United States
Burnsville
Minnesota
-
ozimek wrote: There was a long thread on this subject a while ago. I think it resulted in a pretty decent rules set. You should probably look it up.
This one? http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/308803/4-player-variant
I think I like the map set-up of that one better. That way it avoids getting surrounded too easily.
Also, this thread had some interesting scoring options: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/559601/eight-army-free-f...
Now back to me not being helpful again:
I think the reason I don't see why there is a need for a free for all is that, out of the box, you can have 4 games going simultaneously. This makes it very easy to put together a small tournament with 4 players that doesn't last all day. And depending on how it's done, this allows army strength differences to be handled easier.
-
Jeff White
United States
Kyle
Texas
-
RiffRaff14 wrote: [q="ozimek"]
Now back to me not being helpful again:
I think the reason I don't see why there is a need for a free for all is that, out of the box, you can have 4 games going simultaneously. This makes it very easy to put together a small tournament with 4 players that doesn't last all day. And depending on how it's done, this allows army strength differences to be handled easier.
True, but I'm not sure why you want add that _you_ have other 4 player games you'd like to play in a thread about how _I'm_ interested in a 4 player battle royal.
2 player tourneys are fun, I agree, and Manoeuvre is great for that. I just want to try a little something different.
Thanks for the links though!
-
|
|
Posted Tue Dec 20, 2011 7:22 pm
