Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
29 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Titan» Forums » Variants

Subject: My quick game variant rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
David Cheng
Hong Kong
Ma On Shan
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I try to shorten the game with these rules.

1) A maximum of 6 legion markers per player
2) A maximum of two moves per turn regardless of number of legions
3) A legion without lords or semi-lords must be conceded if attacked by enemy of larger force. (Exceptions: legion in tower or with three natives or more)
4) Archangel is acquired on every score of 300 instead of 500
5) First player scores 800 points wins.

Pls comment on my quick game variant.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J Weintraub
United States
Commack
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Lock him up!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Is larger force more units, or higher point value?

One concern here is that this pretty well negates the value of terrain. A legion of green units in the jungle up against a slightly superior force of non-native units, for instance, is likely to win the battle.

Also, limiting the number of stacks that can move could lengthen the game, rather than shorten it.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ray
Thailand
Bangkok
Bangkok
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Warbanner wrote:

One concern here is that this pretty well negates the value of terrain. A legion of green units in the jungle up against a slightly superior force of non-native units, for instance, is likely to win the battle.


Confirmed. I have seen on many occasions a smaller force of native creatures defeat a much larger force of non-native creatures.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max DuBoff
United States
New Brunswick
New Jersey
flag msg tools
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: / Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
badge
Habeo in animo vivere in perpetuum aut mori dum conor.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
RayGuns wrote:
Warbanner wrote:

One concern here is that this pretty well negates the value of terrain. A legion of green units in the jungle up against a slightly superior force of non-native units, for instance, is likely to win the battle.


Confirmed. I have seen on many occasions a smaller force of native creatures defeat a much larger force of non-native creatures.


I totally agree. Doesn't this also kill the strategy of trying to wear down a person's Titan unit while it is weak?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Cheng
Hong Kong
Ma On Shan
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
"Is larger force more units, or higher point value?"

More units.

"One concern here is that this pretty well negates the value of terrain. A legion of green units in the jungle up against a slightly superior force of non-native units, for instance, is likely to win the battle."

Yes, you are right. But one should not neglect the impact of morale in battle. A legion without a lord/semi lord is like a mercenary army. They are more likely to flee in face of a larger enemy force. They may not even know what the enemies are before they have to make the decision to flee.

I would add exceptions to rule number 3 :
- legion in tower
- legion with three natives or more.

I think these are easier & faster to do than calculating the total points of both forces. This rule also gives the lords & semi-lords more values & new strategies in spliting force.

"Also, limiting the number of stacks that can move could lengthen the game, rather than shorten it."

One common problem I see is players tend to forget which stack has been moved after moving the third stack. I know there are solutions to solve this problem but I think limiting the number of moving stacks to two is the most effective way. Usually people will think for the best route for EACH stack one by one even it cannot gain any creature. With two moves, now players just need to focus on the stacks which actually can gain something good or making attacks. Limiting the number of moves to two also force players to give up useless stacks. Weaker stacks can now be eliminated faster. Players can also plan his moves in advance more easily when other players are moving, coz he just have two moves each turn.



 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Adam Kazimierczak
United States
Falmouth
Maine
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I just can't believe that I read "Titan" and "quick" in the same sentence. surprise

Mind = blown.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Cheng
Hong Kong
Ma On Shan
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The two moves rule also reduce the impact of luck. Get a lucky roll & gain creature for every stack? Not with this rule now.

Three hours is quick when comparing to six hours.

"Doesn't this also kill the strategy of trying to wear down a person's Titan unit while it is weak?"

You can also use this strategy for legions with lords/semi-lords or large stacks.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max DuBoff
United States
New Brunswick
New Jersey
flag msg tools
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: / Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
badge
Habeo in animo vivere in perpetuum aut mori dum conor.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Do you find that this tends to hamper players' recruitment of bigger and stronger units. I'm just curious; I find this intriguing.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Cheng
Hong Kong
Ma On Shan
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MD1616 wrote:
Do you find that this tends to hamper players' recruitment of bigger and stronger units. I'm just curious; I find this intriguing.


"this" refers to which rule? Two moves?

I found the Two Moves rule & limit of six markers force players to focus on getting bigger & stronger unit instead. Since legion markers is limited to six, players should not waste space for getting weak creatures unless chased by a large stack. The Two Moves rule also force players to choose which stacks to get creatures thus reducing the chance of getting useless creatures. With reduction of stacks on map, the map should be less crowding, so the chance of developing a strong stack is higher.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J Weintraub
United States
Commack
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Lock him up!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ultracheng wrote:
"Is larger force more units, or higher point value?"

More units.



In a word, no. This is terrible. 6 Ogres attacking 2 Dragons and 3 Minotaurs would force the Dragons to flee. That's crazy. Calculating point value isn't hard if you know how to do basic multiplication. It takes seconds.

Quote:

Yes, you are right. But one should not neglect the impact of morale in battle. A legion without a lord/semi lord is like a mercenary army. They are more likely to flee in face of a larger enemy force. They may not even know what the enemies are before they have to make the decision to flee.

Now you're adding your own thematic spin to the game. This has nothing to do with shortening it. You always have to see your opponents stack before battle. The game as your describing is already unrecognizable as Titan.

Quote:

"Also, limiting the number of stacks that can move could lengthen the game, rather than shorten it."

One common problem I see is players tend to forget which stack has been moved after moving the third stack. I know there are solutions to solve this problem but I think limiting the number of moving stacks to two is the most effective way.


So, you're eliminating this because people can't simply track more than two stacks of units per turn? I don't know how to say this without sounding insulting, but that sounds to me like you're playing stupid people. Is it really so hard to just flip or rotate your stack marker after moving it, and put it back at the end of your turn? Again, you don't sound like the problem your solving is that the game is too long.

Quote:

Usually people will think for the best route for EACH stack one by one even it cannot gain any creature. With two moves, now players just need to focus on the stacks which actually can gain something good or making attacks. Limiting the number of moves to two also force players to give up useless stacks. Weaker stacks can now be eliminated faster. Players can also plan his moves in advance more easily when other players are moving, coz he just have two moves each turn.


Or fewer options might mean harder decisions, because you're more limited in your ability to maneuver, thus lengthening movement.

It sounds to me like the real solution to your problem is having players become more familiar with the game. My first play lasted something like 8 hours, because all but one player was a new player. Experience players finish games in 2-3 hours without much difficulty, 4 at the outside.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max DuBoff
United States
New Brunswick
New Jersey
flag msg tools
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: / Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
badge
Habeo in animo vivere in perpetuum aut mori dum conor.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ultracheng wrote:
MD1616 wrote:
Do you find that this tends to hamper players' recruitment of bigger and stronger units. I'm just curious; I find this intriguing.


"this" refers to which rule? Two moves?


I meant all the rules, but I was specifically referring to the limit on legions, the limit on number of moves, and the automatic flight rule.

I also don't really understand the flight rule on a logical note. It seems like it might spawn tactics aimed at merely putting a lord with crappy units to attack an opponent's good units (in a smaller, non-lord stack), thus stifling the motivation to as quickly as possible get better units.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Cheng
Hong Kong
Ma On Shan
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
"6 Ogres attacking 2 Dragons and 3 Minotaurs would force the Dragons to flee. That's crazy."

That's why I added the exceptions. As long as the stack stays in homeland of dragons/minotaurs, they will not flee. Player should keep at least one lord/semi-lord in his strong stack.

"Now you're adding your own thematic spin to the game. This has nothing to do with shortening it."

Adding theme is not to shorten the game but to explain the reason behind the rule which actually helps to shorten the game. I'm sure the game will be shortened with the auto-flee rule.

"So, you're eliminating this because people can't simply track more than two stacks of units per turn? I don't know how to say this without sounding insulting, but that sounds to me like you're playing stupid people. Is it really so hard to just flip or rotate your stack marker after moving it, and put it back at the end of your turn?"

No, the rule is not for this. I already mentioned there are other solutions like what you suggested. I just want to say this rule could help to solve that problem but the purpose of the rule is not for this. The purpose is to reduce the down time between players.

"Or fewer options might mean harder decisions, because you're more limited in your ability to maneuver, thus lengthening movement."

Except for auto-flee, I don't really reduce options or ability to maneuver. Instead I reduce the impact of luck. Main problem I see in original games is the players having too many stacks to take care of which creates long down time & unneccessary battles.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kelly Bass
United States
Venice
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It sounds to me that you wish to eliminate the time spent on castoff legions. It would really focus on the main two. I don't know if I'd be willing to trade in the usefulness of castoffs to shorten the game.
If you're already going to play with the points (Arch & End Game), you might consider reducing the points given in a flee from 1/2 to 1/4 or 1/6, which would increase the number of flees, without forcing them or using some fiddly native calculations.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Cheng
Hong Kong
Ma On Shan
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
"I also don't really understand the flight rule on a logical note. It seems like it might spawn tactics aimed at merely putting a lord with crappy units to attack an opponent's good units (in a smaller, non-lord stack), thus stifling the motivation to as quickly as possible get better units."

You don't need a lord to attack enemy stacks. Instead you would stick your better units with a lord/semi-lord. Also you may not know which enemy stack has lords & which has none. I don't see why this may stifle the motivation to get better units asap.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Cheng
Hong Kong
Ma On Shan
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
"If you're already going to play with the points (Arch & End Game), you might consider reducing the points given in a flee from 1/2 to 1/4 or 1/6, which would increase the number of flees, without forcing them or using some fiddly native calculations."

I don't understand the logic. More flees already cut down the scores players get in attacks. Why cutting the scores down further more? The End Game rule is to shorten the game. So cutting the scores down further is to extend the game length. If you think 800 points is too easy, you can adjust it to 900 or 1000 points as you like.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kelly Bass
United States
Venice
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The logic was to try to reward more flees in an unforced manner, without much thought to shortening the game length, which isn't really a problem for me.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max DuBoff
United States
New Brunswick
New Jersey
flag msg tools
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: / Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
badge
Habeo in animo vivere in perpetuum aut mori dum conor.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ultracheng wrote:
"I also don't really understand the flight rule on a logical note. It seems like it might spawn tactics aimed at merely putting a lord with crappy units to attack an opponent's good units (in a smaller, non-lord stack), thus stifling the motivation to as quickly as possible get better units."

You don't need a lord to attack enemy stacks. Instead you would stick your better units with a lord/semi-lord. Also you may not know which enemy stack has lords & which has none. I don't see why this may stifle the motivation to get better units asap.


Oftentimes, after the first few turns, I'll have a stack that looks something like Angel Gargoyle Gargoyle Centaur Centaur Lion Lion. Obviously, this stack is pretty bad. Now, I normally split off the centaurs or gargoyles or something like that. But, under your variant rules, I could go jump your newly formed stack of rangers that can have up to 6 units. (I have, of course, been tracking which stack has the rangers.) My 7-high stack can continue to attack your qualitatively better stack without ever worrying about casualties.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Cheng
Hong Kong
Ma On Shan
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Now I got your point. Without forcing means no auto-flee. It may works to attract more flees. Hmmm...I think 1/4 is fine but 1/6 is hard to calculate without a calculator.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Cheng
Hong Kong
Ma On Shan
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
"Oftentimes, after the first few turns, I'll have a stack that looks something like Angel Gargoyle Gargoyle Centaur Centaur Lion Lion. Obviously, this stack is pretty bad. Now, I normally split off the centaurs or gargoyles or something like that. But, under your variant rules, I could go jump your newly formed stack of rangers that can have up to 6 units. (I have, of course, been tracking which stack has the rangers.) My 7-high stack can continue to attack your qualitatively better stack without ever worrying about casualties."

Of course, you can do this if you get the chance. I don't see any problem here. 6 rangers is 16 x 6 = 96 points. Your Angel stack is (24 + 12 x 4 + 15 x 2 = 102 points which is still higher than the ranger stack in terms of points. I don't see the problem of no casualty either. As you said your Angel stack is pretty bad, I don't see why you will worry about losing any of those crappy creatures.

Another point is even you know that stack has six rangers, you must make sure you get the right roll to move your angel stack to the target hex. Your assumption sounds like your angel stack can move to attack any stack on the map continously as you want, which is not the case obviously.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max DuBoff
United States
New Brunswick
New Jersey
flag msg tools
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: / Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
badge
Habeo in animo vivere in perpetuum aut mori dum conor.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Besides the fact that that ranger stack has a chance to win the battle, the angel might die, which actually is really important. It's frankly not fair to automatically waive casualties when the point difference between the stacks is 6 points.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Cheng
Hong Kong
Ma On Shan
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Not fair? Your angel may or may not be killed in combat. Who knows? By fleeing the ranger stack player can ensure you get 48 points less. Fair or not, I don't know. In additions, no causalty is not always a good thing. If the 48 points you get gain you another angel, in this case, your new angel is wasted.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max DuBoff
United States
New Brunswick
New Jersey
flag msg tools
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: / Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
badge
Habeo in animo vivere in perpetuum aut mori dum conor.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ultracheng wrote:
Not fair? Your angel may or may not be killed in combat. Who knows? By fleeing the ranger stack player can ensure you get 48 points less. Fair or not, I don't know. In additions, no causalty is not always a good thing. If the 48 points you get gain you another angel, in this case, your new angel is wasted.


Yes, but the whole point is that there is a decision about whether or not to flee. This decision has to be based on the game situation and can not and should not be boiled down to "always do this."
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Cheng
Hong Kong
Ma On Shan
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I see the opposition towards forced flee. Ok, I can get rid of it if it creates too many troubles. Let say rule number 3 is not used, how about the other rules? Do you think they work to reduce game length without creating new troubles?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max DuBoff
United States
New Brunswick
New Jersey
flag msg tools
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: / Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
badge
Habeo in animo vivere in perpetuum aut mori dum conor.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I like your creativity, but the 2-move limit somehow just doesn't seem in the spirit of the game...

I agree that a limit would actually lengthen movement time because the decision would be more agonizing.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ray
Thailand
Bangkok
Bangkok
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ultracheng wrote:
I see the opposition towards forced flee. Ok, I can get rid of it if it creates too many troubles. Let say rule number 3 is not used, how about the other rules? Do you think they work to reduce game length without creating new troubles?


Ultracheng wrote:

4) Archangel is acquired on every score of 300 instead of 500


Getting an Archangel so early can be a game changer. Especially with limited number of stacks (six legion markers) and only two moves per turn. Imagine that the strongest character you have and it can be called into from another legion when you attack. Yep, it can change things very fast early in a game.

Titan works great as is, but that is just my opinion.

For me, its not about how many games you can play in a specific time limit, but rather the quality of the gaming experience. I would much rather play a very good game that takes a few hours to play than a few mediocre games that can be played in the same amount of time.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.