Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
5 Posts

Memoir '44» Forums » Variants

Subject: Improved (?) Team Play Rules rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
James C
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
As I've posted before, I find the team play rules for Basic M '44 a bit unsatisfactory. It essentially amounts to decision by committee. It lacks the feel of genuine responsibility over any particular part of the battle.

Many have suggested allowing teammates to simply alternate play: e.g., Axis Player A goes on turn 1. Allies Player A follows, then Axis Player B, then Allies Player B, etc.

I don't like this approach as it tips off the other side as to where the next attack will be coming from. Of course, this can't be known with certainty - but with a fair degree of probability. So, if Player A controls the Allied Center, and launches an attack on turn 1, the Axis player pretty much knows that the second Allied attack won't be from the center.

To remedy this, I propose the following: allow each team's Commmander-in-Chief to override the turn sequence a limited number of times throughout the game. The limit should equal the number of victory medals needed to win a particular scenario. Thus, if a particular scenario requires 5 medals to win, each CIC can invoke "override" 5 times. This way, shorter scenarios will provide fewer override opportunities than longer scenarios, preventing the exception from swallowing the rule.

This means that, up to five times (for example) the CIC can substitute his/her play for that of a field general, or, conversely, allow a field general to play on a turn when the CIC was scheduled to go.

As a practical matter, to keep track of overrides, I place five pennies in front of each CIC, all with heads showing at the start of the battle. Each time override is invoked, a penny is flipped over to tails.

This keeps each team very much on its toes throughout the battle. Nothing prevents a side from launching 3 flank attacks in a row if need be (unless overrides are all used up, which would represent the temporary exhaustion of resources and tactical support on the battlefield).

I think this way, each teammate has genuine ownership of his/her fields of responsibility. He/she generally knows when he'll be playing next, and can plan his moves accordingly. He may, at times, be overridden by the CIC, but such is the life of an officer.

For 3 player games (2 versus 1), the single-player team should also be required to alternate attacks as would a CIC and his/her flank commander - with an allowance for a limited number of overrides as well.

Any thoughts?

PS: I am aware of Overlord and have played it. Overlord is indeed more amendable to multiplayer play. That said, I generally find Overlord's costs (time to set up and general cumbersomeness) to outweigh its benefits. I find it detracts too much from the magic of M'44: the game's ability to provide a quick and dirty battle game experience that maximizes the excitement and fun while minimizing the tedium and work.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Orion J.N. Winder
United States
Holly Hill
South Carolina
flag msg tools
ALL ACCESS - ALL THE TIME - DON'T EVEN ASK
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm not sure how you're playing, but as far as I know ALL movement on one side is to be done first, and then all battles. I'm not seeing where the varience for "see where the attack will come next" is about.
This to me would be the same whether playing one on one, or teams, which is exactly the same as Overlord too; all moves first, then all battles afterwards, in order decided by the players commanding the units.

As a second thought, I find Overlord to be well worth the setup time, especially with the pre-printed maps. And the game is SO much better that it's hardly comparable. I first got into the Epic games in C&C:Ancients, and after seeing how much better that made that system I tried the M44 Overlord, and found it far superior IMHO than standard Memoir. Overlord scratches an actual battle itch, where standard now just seems like a quickie. But YMMV arrrh
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James C
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Test
In Overlord, each teammate does indeed make a move (ordinarily). But in basic M'44 team play, each SIDE moves once (I.e. plays only one card) per turn.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Phill Webb
Australia
Melbourne
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Professor X wrote:
So, if Player A controls the Allied Center, and launches an attack on turn 1, the Axis player pretty much knows that the second Allied attack won't be from the center.

This is the bit that hasn't been communicated well to you.

In that variant each player plays as if it is a single player game when it is their turn i.e. play a card that orders any section.

Phill
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Orion J.N. Winder
United States
Holly Hill
South Carolina
flag msg tools
ALL ACCESS - ALL THE TIME - DON'T EVEN ASK
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Freeloading Phill wrote:
Professor X wrote:
So, if Player A controls the Allied Center, and launches an attack on turn 1, the Axis player pretty much knows that the second Allied attack won't be from the center.

This is the bit that hasn't been communicated well to you.

In that variant each player plays as if it is a single player game when it is their turn i.e. play a card that orders any section.

Phill


I'm guessing that this a varient that I'm not familier with, as I've never (and feel the game is too "small" for it) played M44 vanilla with more than 2 (unless you count learners/kibitzers). Hense I guess the original query would be out of my balliwick and I should keep my nose elsewhere laugh.

I do like the game, even though I also play TOI, SL, ASL and tons of other "wargames". I just thought it was a misplayed/misunderstood, instead of a varient on the rules. Play on...
 
 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.