Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
11 Posts

GKR: Heavy Hitters» Forums » Rules

Subject: Points to determine winner rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Bill
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Isnt it strange that the focus of the game is to destroy 4 buildings but as soon as someone dies the score to determine the winner has nothing to do with who got closer to finishing that objective?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Cairns
Scotland
Glasgow
Scotland
flag msg tools
There’s two objectives:

1. Be the first to claim four buildings for your faction.
2. Destroy all other factions.

Players can win by focusing on either one of these objectives.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Trueflight Silverwing
United States
Waverly
New York
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, if you eliminate the competition, you have all the time in the world to tag all the buildings that you want.

Tagging enough buildings ends the game instantly. Taking out the opponents means that you can tag all of them at your own pace.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Aaron Cloutier
United States
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
The scoring only happens in a game with more than 2 players. As soon as ONE player dies, the other two look at points to see who won. Alternatively it says you can play last bot standing which then switches to the same rules as two player:

If you've killed all the opposition you automatically win. No Score.

OR

If you destroy the required 4 buildings you automatically win. No Score.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Hunter
New Zealand
Hamilton
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
BubbleGumBill wrote:
Isnt it strange that the focus of the game is to destroy 4 buildings but as soon as someone dies the score to determine the winner has nothing to do with who got closer to finishing that objective?


I thought this was strange as well. I would have thought that on destruction of a HH, whoever was closest to the 4 building win condition, should be the winner (as that is what you are working towards). If that is tied, it could then go to HH health and achievement track.

The current tie breaker, for if the health + achievement is tied, is also a little strange. It only seems to take into account placed holoboards, and not buildings demolished.

Would be interesting to know the thought process behind the current system. I'm sure they would have play tested multiple different win conditions, and come up with this as the best option, but would be good to know why.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Hunter
New Zealand
Hamilton
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
SuperMCDad wrote:
BubbleGumBill wrote:
Isnt it strange that the focus of the game is to destroy 4 buildings but as soon as someone dies the score to determine the winner has nothing to do with who got closer to finishing that objective?


I thought this was strange as well. I would have thought that on destruction of a HH, whoever was closest to the 4 building win condition, should be the winner (as that is what you are working towards). If that is tied, it could then go to HH health and achievement track.

Using the achievement track as part of the win condition doesn't seem to factor in much, as in both the games I've played so far, it was quite easy to max these out. You can continue getting achievements, but once that board is maxed out, it doesn't really matter any more.

The current tie breaker, for if the health + achievement is tied, is also a little strange. It only seems to take into account placed holoboards, and not buildings demolished.

Would be interesting to know the thought process behind the current system. I'm sure they would have play tested multiple different win conditions, and come up with this as the best option, but would be good to know why.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Darryn Ying
msg tools
I agree I think that we'd look to home rule this unfortunately. The issue I have with the rules as they stand is it rewards avoiding combat to the point where its advantageous to just hide the entirety of the game and tag buildings.

This way you will either win by destroying 4 buildings or if a GKR is destroyed you should win by suffering the least damage, the achievement tracker doesn't make up enough points and you can also still get the odd achievement in avoiding combat.

I'd like to have seen in the event of a GKR being destroyed, the first tie break being damage dealt or the like.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Hunter
New Zealand
Hamilton
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Luggsie wrote:
I agree I think that we'd look to home rule this unfortunately. The issue I have with the rules as they stand is it rewards avoiding combat to the point where its advantageous to just hide the entirety of the game and tag buildings.


This.

I really like the game, and we've had a lot of fun playing, but that win condition does seem a bit hokey. We've played 3 games so far at 3 or 4 players. The last 2 games have been won via player elimination, and it's a bit of a toss up at that point as to who will win. Basically coming down to the person who managed to avoid the most fire. You can't really judge who to go after, as you can't really tell how much damage someone has taken. And as the achievement track tends to max out, it doesn't really come into play.

I may try a pacifist strategy next time, and see how it goes. Basically, attacking and tagging with the supports, while keeping the HH out of the fight as much as possible (while tagging). It may be the most viable strategy to win the game, however it probably won't be particularly fun.

I'm not sure what a better win condition would be. I guess you could keep track of damage done, but that feels a bit fiddly. Any other suggestions?



 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ben Turner
Australia
Melbourne
VIC
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Played my first game last night and also have reservations about the tactics the scoring encouraged (although we did point at the chap with the least damage and blasted him back into second place)

The score does include destroyed buildings in so far as they give you achievement points.

With only 10 buildings, it seemed unlikely you’d get four of them - in our game, everyone got two buildings, so someone would have to have amazing luck to get the remaining two before anyone else stopped them. So I can see a lot of 4p games ending in scoring
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Calvin Candie
msg tools
Phantomwhale wrote:
Played my first game last night and also have reservations about the tactics the scoring encouraged (although we did point at the chap with the least damage and blasted him back into second place)

The score does include destroyed buildings in so far as they give you achievement points.

With only 10 buildings, it seemed unlikely you’d get four of them - in our game, everyone got two buildings, so someone would have to have amazing luck to get the remaining two before anyone else stopped them. So I can see a lot of 4p games ending in scoring


I think in truth this method was brought about just to avoid the whole 'player elimination' thing.

If you play with the win conditions as being,

'First to 4 Buildings'
or
'Last Man Standing'

this fixes almost all the problems, I don't think fudging together a house rule would do any good as it would mean lots of card counting and point grabbing. Also, last man standing would change tactics dramatically and make the 4 buildings element more likely as the win condition. This is why 2p works so well by comparison to 3 or 4, as these are the conditions.

Personally in future, my 2 or 3p games will be last man standing, and 4 player will either be last man standing or 2 v 2 where you must either tag 6 buildings or kill 1 opposing player. Then no one has to count achievements or damage. Yayy!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vincent Bouatou
msg tools
In our 2 v 2 games, the winning strategy has ALWAYS been having two players focusing on taking down one designated HH, tagging buildings only to get sponsor cards.
We have found it to be a bit frustrating.
 
 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.