Question Dump: Post Your Questions Here.

[Airborne Elite 5]

Originally Posted by happyjosiah

Really? What space did it move to?



Let's consider the following scenario. It's a three-player free-for-all game.

I have a figure with move 5 engaged with one of Bob's figures. 5 spaces away is another of Bob's figures who he really wants to protect.

But 2 spaces away to the other side, Alice has a figure.

I ask Bob if I can leave to go attack Alice, but secretly I want to attack Bob's other figure.

If I have to actually MOVE before the engagement attack occurs, Bob's plan of action would be clear: make the attack if I move towards his figure, don't make the attack if I move towards Alice's, knowing that if I take a single move the opposite way, I can't reach the figure he wants to protect.

The way I interpret the rules, rather than moving, I should say to Bob "I want to break engagement". Before I make a move, he needs to decide to make or forgo his LEA, without seeing which way my figure moves first.

Why are you trying so hard to get this to work for you? As you read above, there is no WTF according to the rules.

[Dad_Scaper]

Originally Posted by Airborne Elite 5

Why are you trying so hard to get this to work for you? As you read above, there is no WTF according to the rules.

What I read above was a discussion, in which everyone thoughtfully expressed honestly held opinions. And both sides are reasonable, and both sides are defensible. There's no reason for an attack like that.

The answer is not at all obvious to me. It was an interesting question and I wouldn't attack, as you are, a person defending one position over another.

[Ericth74]

I think we are going to try both free for all and kill the player to your right. I'll throw out the points idea as well and see who is interested. In a points game do you end at a certain round or when someone dies or when a certain point total is reached?

Thanks for the info.


[2QUOTE=Dad_Scaper;2158879]

Originally Posted by obfuscatedhippo

A symmetrical map will help to balance out the game.

3-way fights can quickly turn into a 2-on-1 if one side starts off too strong. Or one player hangs back until the other two are weakened from battling each other - trying to hold out to be last man or woman standing.

In some games, we've used a Points Destroyed scoring system to encourage more aggressive combat. All of your units might be destroyed but if you destroyed more than another player - you can still 'win.'

Excellent question.

Obfuscatedhippo describes my preferred form of 3-player 'Scape. Keep track of what you kill. A squad of Krav is 100 points; if you kill one of them, then write down 33 points. Kaemon Awa has 4 health; if you put two wounds on him, write down 60 points. And so on. Whoever has the most points at the end wins. Some people think this system has confusing corner cases but that's because those people aren't following those simple instructions. Cyprien heals, so he can, by the time he's ultimately killed, give out way more than his 150 points.

Other people talk about playing "kill the person on your left." In a game like that, your goal is to kill one player, to your right or to your left, and so on in a circle. When one player has successfully eliminated his or her target, that player is the winner.

The way you're describing is a pure free-for-all. I've played that way, too. As you guess in your post, it does change your strategy. For one thing, it involves some diplomacy, and for another, it promotes a "turtle" strategy, in which you try to stay back a bit as the other players fight each other. But you can't do nothing, either.

Please let us know which way you choose to play and how it goes. Thanks for letting us be a part of it![/QUOTE]

[Airborne Elite 5]

Originally Posted by Dad_Scaper

What I read above was a discussion, in which everyone thoughtfully expressed honestly held opinions. And both sides are reasonable, and both sides are defensible. There's no reason for an attack like that.

The answer is not at all obvious to me. It was an interesting question and I wouldn't attack, as you are, a person defending one position over another.

How can one side be reasonable when the rules say it's not?

[Dad_Scaper]

When I run that format at a tournament, the game ends when there is only one player left, or when the time for the round expires. But, if it's ending when there's only one player left, that player may not be the winner, if another player has more points.

The reason why I like that format is it encourages the players to engage with each other. If you sit in your start zone and turtle, that gives you a significant advantage if you're playing in a last-man-standing format. That format, though it's the most obvious, gives players an obvious incentive to do nothing.

If, however, you are getting points for killing stuff, then all the players have an incentive to leap from their start zones and engage with each other as fast as possible. That's why I like the format.

edit: @AE5, the rules don't address the situation exactly. That's the whole reason we were having the discussion.

Understand that when you wrote "Why are you trying so hard to get this to work for you," you are attacking the other person in the debate, and not the position the person is exploring. There is no cause to do that here. Everyone is being nice, no need to start personal attacks.

[Sheep]

Originally Posted by Airborne Elite 5

How can one side be reasonable when the rules say it's not?

Not that it's reasonable, but that there is a lack of immediate clarity. The whole conversation took a lot of nitpicking at rules to clarify that WTF is not retained. To not see that there can be confusion is completely un-empathetic.

To me it comes down to that one line or maybe even one word in the BftU rule book, "onto".

[flameslayer93]

For the FFA, you can also end it when one player has accrued the majority of the points (so, for a combined total of 1350 points, use 676 points). This may allow some extra time for another game.

[Ericth74]

Thanks! I'm always down for another game!

Originally Posted by flameslayer93

For the FFA, you can also end it when one player has accrued the majority of the points (so, for a combined total of 1350 points, use 676 points). This may allow some extra time for another game.

[Sheep]

How many red and blue dice came in the first master set originally?

[Airborne Elite 5]

Originally Posted by heroscaper2010

How many red and blue dice came in the first master set originally?

10 each.

[mac122]

Quoting myself and the rule book. Please refer to the bolded part below.

Originally Posted by mac122

The focus for the question should be the bolded part. The LEA doesn't come into play unless the figure moves out of engagement. So, even though it didn't make it, the figure had to move to trigger the LEA. It moved 0 spaces. The part in red doesn't come into play until after the figure moved and after the LEA is resolved and therefore doesn't change the fact that the figure did move in the first place.

The rules governing a leaving engagement attack do not say you announce you are going to break engagement, they say "A figure that moves out of engagement..." The figure has to move to trigger the LEA. There is no ambiguity here. There is movement, therefore WTF does not work for this turn. The other side of this argument is going directly against the rulebook.

[09167]

Quick question, i feel dumb for asking but ive never honestly thought about it in all my years of playing. Is there a maximum distance that squads can be away from each other? Like if i have marro warriors can i have one in a river while the others are fighting in a castle on the other side of the map? Tried looking around for the answer and i think the answer is no max distance but thought id get community input just in case i missed something.