Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
3 Posts

Power Grid: The First Sparks» Forums » Variants

Subject: Neolithic War rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
George Husted
United States
East Hartford
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
.
.
Tribes may attack other tribes. This is done immediately following the spreading the clan phase and is done in turn order. To initiate an attack, the attacker must have a tribe marker in the same area as the opponent being attacked, must have a "numerical advantage", and must pay one food for every tribe piece participating in the attack (minimum of 2 food).

A numerical advantage occurs when the attacker has a tribe placed in the same space as an opponent AND has at least one more tribe adjacent to that space than the defender has. A bonus is awarded for each additional tribe piece engaged in the combat above the initial ones required to achieve numerical advantage.

Combat is resolved by both the attacker and the defender rolling one die, with the attacker rolling first. The results are compared and the higher result wins the combat.

Dice are modified as follows:

For each attacker engaged in the battle above the initial number required to achieve numerical superiority, add one to the attacker's die result. (Remember, each figure attacking costs one food to participate.)

Both attackers and defenders modify their die roll by plus one for each spear tool, bow tool, and intelligence that they have.

All modifiers are cumulative.

Combat is resolved as follows:

If the defender wins by 2 or more, the attacker in the same space is eliminated.

If the defender wins by 1, the attacker must withdraw to an adjacent space that his tribe does not already occupy. If the attacker is not able to withdraw, it is eliminated.

Tie means no effect (except the attacker wasted food).

If the attacker wins by 1, then the defender must withdraw to an adjacent space that his tribe does not already occupy. If the defender is not able to withdraw, it is eliminated.

If the attacker wins by 2 or more, the defender in that space is eliminated.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
T. Dauphin
Canada
Belleville
Ontario
flag msg tools
Avatar

Yes. "Spoken" like a true wargamer.

I like the idea, but I would make it more "expensive" to conduct. It seems to me the costs and rewards are both potentially high.

And why would a tribe attack another? At this stage, it would surely have been about the survival "stuff". And as the primary tool we have to measure this by is food, then I think food would be the reward.

Coldwarrior1984 wrote:
.
.
Tribes may attack other tribes. This is done immediately following the spreading the clan phase and is done in turn order. To initiate an attack, the attacker must have a tribe marker in the same area as the opponent being attacked, must have a "numerical advantage", and must pay one food for every tribe piece participating in the attack (minimum of 2 food).


I would eliminate the need for superiority, but continue with the bonuses for numerical advantage. So 1 vs 2, defender gets +1; 3 vs 1, attacker gets +2, etc. Small numbers can achieve get results by stealth (especially if they're more Intelligent)

Coldwarrior1984 wrote:

A numerical advantage occurs when the attacker has a tribe placed in the same space as an opponent AND has at least one more tribe adjacent to that space than the defender has. A bonuse is awarded for each additional tribe piece engaged in the combat above the initial ones required to achieve numerical advantage.

Combat is resolved by both the attacker and the defender rolling one die, with the attacker rolling first. The results are compared and the higher result wins the combat.

Dice are modified as follows:

For each attacker engaged in the battle above the initial number required to achieve numerical superiority, add one to the attacker's die result. (Remember, each figure attacking costs one food to participate.)

Both attackers and defenders modify their die roll by plus one for each spear tool, bow tool, and intelligence that they have.


Or, alternatively, +1 only if your tool is superior (higher numbered) than your opponent's.

Coldwarrior1984 wrote:

All modifiers are cumulative.

Combat is resolved as follows:

If the defender wins by 2 or more, the attacker in the same space is eliminated.

If the defender wins by 1, the attacker must withdraw to an adjacent space that his tribe does not already occupy. If the attacker is not able to withdraw, it is eliminated.

Tie means no effect (except the attacker wasted food).

If the attacker wins by 1, then the defender must withdraw to an adjacent space that his tribe does not already occupy. If the defender is not able to withdraw, it is eliminated.

If the attacker wins by 2 or more, the defender in that space is eliminated.


If the attacker wins by 3 or more, s/he rolls 1d6. S/He now has the option to steal food and/or a combination of the above results with food theft as follows;
based on the d6 roll;
1. steal that many food, or
2. 'pay' 1 for the withdrawal result, and use the remaining for food theft, or
3. 'pay' 2 for the elimination result, and use the remaining for food theft.
Only the attacker can steal food.

eg. After winning the combat by 3 or more, yellow rolls a 4. Yellow causes the elimination of the defender's unit (for a cost of 2) and steals 2 food.

This needs to be tested and developed. I might be tempted to use 2d4 for the theft roll rather than 1d6.

I'm also inclined to suggest that this would take place instead of hunting in that tile (for both sides!).

I'm tempted to suggest you could steal a tool instead of food. I'd have to think about how exactly that would be done.


1 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
George Husted
United States
East Hartford
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You have some really good ideas there. I may borrow them.

Thank you very much for the feedback. I especially like the modifiers being based on the strength value of the tool.

I had thought about getting a technology for winning, but I don't have enough play experience to have a good feel for whether it would unbalance the game too much. I would like to experiment with that. I also very much like your idea of the winner getting food from the loser.

In real world terms, warfare happens sometimes simply because the other group is in your territory or because you decide you want their territory. I have been reading about warfare in the Neolithic period, and it seems that as forensic archeologists become informed on what to look for, they are seeing more and more evidence that warfare did occur and there are now theories about the agricultural revolution leading to war. When they find a skull with an axe hole in it and no evidence of healing it is pretty certain that the death was violent and deliberate.

Also, there is a LOT of evidence that cannibalism was widespread. They have found cut marks on bones that suggest butchering of the bodies and a large percentage of modern human populations have genetic markers that are from cannibalism. You can read about it here: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/04/0410_030410_...

So, it just seemed natural to me that there should be war as rival tribes pushed and bumped into each other's territories.

You have some great ideas. Thanks again for sharing them.

--------------
On a side note, purely from a gamer's perspective, warfare offers a tremendous number of new decision points to the game and a different path to winning. I find most games are better with multiple paths to victory and more decision points for players to ponder.

I know that some may be put off by taking this peaceful Eurogame and transforming it to include war. I hope that folks will consider the real history of mankind, the new paths for winning, and the expansion of decision points as worth the exploration.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
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.