Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
6 Posts

Antike II» Forums » Variants

Subject: Antike II as a team game rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Hardy
Germany
Münster
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hey,

we recently played Axes&Allies, and even though we probabyly won't play it again (because much too long and also too fiddly) we liked about the team play. Thsi reduces some of the problems with multiplayer games which include attacking each other.
In Antike with its no-luck combat and economic system some of those problems arer very strong. e.g. a very small and minor combat very early in the game with an neighor can give you a disadvante which will increase and will let you down with almost no chance to catch up (except if other fight each other a lot later but exclude you).
So having only 2 sides in a conflict game (even if there are multiple players/nations)seems a very good idea. Unfortunately though, almost none of those games realize this kind of play.

It stroke me that Antike should work well as team-game, and thus the few shortcoming of this game could be eradicated and become a really great game.

Right now I don't see any problems in simply playing this in 2 teams, if you are 4 or 6 players.
Just allot partners on opposite positions of the map, and then the game can start as usual without any rule modifications necessary (each player playing his own nation for himself).
Only the victory conditions change: You win, if you and your partner(s) have gathered 15 VP in addition (4p game) or 18 VP (6p game).

15/18 are just an estimation of what might be a good victory condition.
I have not playtested this yet, but will hopefully soon.

Or have I overlooked any problems which might arise?

With 3 or 5 players it might work also theoretically, but of course some changes in the setup would be necessary to re-balance it, which would require a lot of testing to find proper solutions.
Maybe something like the 2p-team (in a 5p-game) will start with 4 cities each or an temple, or even both? Hard to tell what would be balanced.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Neil Christiansen
United States
Mount Pleasant
Michigan
flag msg tools
badge
OOK! OOK! OOK!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
What factions would you see as logical teams for 4 and 6 player games?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Filip Cam
Belgium
Kontich
Antwerp
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Good idea, but I think you're too optimistic about how easy it would be to make this work. For starters, can allies enter each other's territories without it causing a fight? Can they trade resources with one another?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hardy
Germany
Münster
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
krommenaas wrote:
Good idea, but I think you're too optimistic about how easy it would be to make this work. For starters, can allies enter each other's territories without it causing a fight? Can they trade resources with one another?


As I said, no changes to rules, so :
- enter withought fighting: yes,
this is possible anyways even in normal game

- trading ressources: no
it might be interesting to allow it, but the trading-progresses would become uninteresting then, so I'd rather make no changes here, either.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hardy
Germany
Münster
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
chris1nd wrote:
What factions would you see as logical teams for 4 and 6 player games?


As I said, factions on oppsite positions on the map.
e.g. in a 4p-game on Mare Nostrum map, Germania and Egyptus would build a tema against Cartahgo and Hellas.

So everyone is sandwiches by two hostile nations.
This is what seems better to me than having two neighors team up.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Paella
United States
East Aurora
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I have the same concerns as the original poster, and this includes almost all Free-For-All multi-player games where players can interfere directly with one another (usually through attacking/conquering), reducing a players forces/production/whatever. The problems that often occur are usually 1 or more of these:
(A) Players fighting one another, especially early in the game, results in them being too far behind from the players that aren't fighting. There's nothing you can do to avoid a dedicated hostile enemy from attacking you.

(B) The player perceived as the leader, or close to winning, is usually ganged-up on by the other players. Either the leader survives the assault and wins or they get crushed and this process is repeated for the newly perceived leader. I dislike this in games as the winner is often determined, not by strategy, but by the disposition of the players. Some players simply refuse to attempt to stop a leader that's about to win or they king-make, enabling a victor. When gang-up occurs, the winner is often the one lucky enough to be out of reach, or out of resources, to be stopped by the other players.


Some may enjoy this type of play but I find the above play to be unrewarding and it ruins an otherwise good game. It's not just Antike II where this occurs, it's most Free-For-All games where players can attack one another, such as Eclipse, Cyclades, Twilight Imperium, Runewars, and countless others.

I always hope games such as these are 2-teams instead of Free-For-All, or have a 2-team variant. Axis & Allies is a good example, and is Conquest of Nerath, and the upcoming Clockwork Wars. For Antike II, a simple 2-team variant ruleset could be:
(1) Teammates can't fight one another or conquer each others cities.

(2) The wining team is the first team to have a VP sum greater than or equal to: normal VPs for the # of players, minus one, then multiplied by the number of players per team. For example:
4-player game: VP sum needed to win: 16. (9 - 1) * 2
4-player game: VP sum needed to win: 18. (7 - 1) * 3

(2) Alternatively, a simpler ending option could be the team wins when a player on their team hits the normal victory conditions: 7 VPs for a 6-player game; 9 VPs for a 4-player game.
 
 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.