UPC's Strategy Articles - To Disengage... (Page 3)

[UranusPChicago]

I have received some requests to make my strategy articles available for download, however, I believe they will be finding their way into upcoming Codexes.

That being said, I will still love to have some feedback/discussions about the articles. Here is the first one...

Strategy within Heroscape is an ever-changing beast and I absolutely love that fact.

If you have been holding out hope for a Heroscape Strategy bible, don’t hold your breath. Strategies that may absolutely apply in one situation within a game might be the worst thing you can do later in the same game. You honestly cannot cover every situation that is going to come up within a game. Being that Army composition can vary greatly (and hopefully is constantly changing with new releases) and that the “board” never has to look the same from game to game, it would be impossible to develop an all-encompassing strategy guideline. With each “Wave” release and each new map design, yesterday’s specific counters may become obsolete. There will never be a defined “opening move” for Heroscape.

However, that being said, there are still plenty of high-level strategies that are applicable from game to game and wave to wave. With that idea in mind, I would like to cover a concept within the game that I refer to as In Game Point Value or IGPV and how it applies to playing Heroscape.

During any game of Heroscape, a unit’s point value is going to fluctuate from the point value listed on the card. Whether it is by figures dying, the make up of your or your opponent’s army, where the unit is located on the map, amount of Order Markers on the card, etc, that unit’s value to the game is going to increase or decrease.

Here is an example…
In a situation where someone has placed 3 Order Markers on a single card during a round, that card’s IGPV increases for the duration of that round. As an opponent, it will more than likely be in my best interest to focus my attacks that round on that particular card because of the possibility of eliminating later Order Marker turns due to the unit’s demise. (But then again, it may be more advantageous to eliminate the “sitting ducks”, units with no Order Markers.) Your choice is ultimately dependant on what will cause the most IGPV damage to your opponent; it is all about Cost vs. Reward.

Another example …
More often than not, Raelin’s value is directly proportional to the amount of units that she is supporting. If an opponent for some reason leaves Raelin back in the starting zone and decides to run kamikaze missions with a single unit at a time, Raelin’s value in the game has decreased. She still has a potential of increasing IGPV, but not with the way she is being used.

Yet another example …
Drafting Spartacus without having Gladiators in your army, albeit very unwise, decreases his IGPV. A large percentage of his value or IGPV is dependant on having Gladiators in your army.

Although it reeks of common sense, figuring out and reassessing IGPVs for both your army and your opponents throughout the game will make you a stronger player. Just because your opponent has Jotun doesn’t mean that he should be the only target of your attack. The Deathreavers that your opponent is using to tie up your ranged units might be a better choice for attacking, even with the knowledge that you could be speeding up their movement via Scatter.

General statements...
A melee unit’s IGPV spikes the moment that they become engaged or move within movement range of an opponent.

A ranged unit’s IGPV drops the moment that they become engaged, because they lose the ability to choose their opponent.

A common unit’s IGPV drops the moment that they are decreased in number to a single card’s worth of units.

A bonding unit’s IGPV drops the moment that their bonding units have been eliminated.

A unit’s IGPV increases each round that it contains an Order Marker.

A unit’s IGPV increases when they are standing on a Glyph.

Next time you play, make a conscious effort to think about IGPV during the game. Weigh your decisions on what will cause the most damage to your opponent utilizing your perceived IGPVs, not necessarily the easiest kill. Remember that an IGPV can change round to round and even turn to turn. Adjust your decision making accordingly. Just because you have the opportunity to take out your opponent’s last Krav Maga Agent shouldn’t change your mind from attacking an exposed Kelda who is trying to make her way over to a wounded Major Q9.

[hex706f726368]

This is my favorite of all the ones you've done so far. When trying to teach the game to friends, I had trouble explaining strategy to them. IGPV gave me a quantifiable means to explain why certain moves were better than others.

[Wytefang]

UPC, you rock. I bow to your HS wisdom.

[LilNewbie]

Nice article, UPC. It's spelled stratergy though....


(just kidding)



Newb.

[SylvrStorm]

This is an interesting way to look at how the changing game situation affects the relative values of units. About the only criticism I can think of is that calling it "In Game Point Value" is a bit of a misnomer, since you're not really assigning points based on circumstances. I'd say simply "In Game Value" or IGV would be a closer fit.

(Then again, I'm new here and I get the feeling that this is one of several such articles that I haven't read, so if specific point value adjustments are discussed in a related article, then disregard that comment.)

Thinking of specific unit values changing through a game is an interesting way to look at it. I think everyone who has played the game has a general gut feel for seeing when a figure is more (or less) valuable because of positioning or whatever, but it's usually more abstract. Breaking it down to say condition X has impact Y on unit Z's relative value would be a good way to organize your thoughts, or to explain such concepts to an inexperienced player.

Some other general statements that could be added to your list (again, forgive me if this has all been said before in another article or discussion):

A unit's IGPV increases with higher elevation.

The impact of order markers on IGPV decreases as units are eliminated (because the player has fewer choices of where they could go).

A splash damage unit's (such as Airborne Elite's grenades) IGPV increases if they are in range of a cluster of adjacent units.

A double-hex unit's IGPV decreases on a map with abundant uneven terrain (i.e. to the point it limits where you can end your move).

Cool concept.

[Wytefang]

Sylvrstorm,

I'd tweak your first statement to read: "A unit's IGPV increases with higher elevation in comparison to its foes" or something like that.

Your suggested statements were quite good, I just wanted to see that first tweaked a little. (Not that I'm ANY kind of strategic HS expert - I'm totally not....yet!)

[SylvrStorm]

Originally Posted by Wytefang

I'd tweak your first statement to read: "A unit's IGPV increases with higher elevation in comparison to its foes" or something like that.

Interesting that you should say that, because I almost worded it like that. Then I thought it made more sense without that addition. If your opponent's pieces are even higher, then their IGPV would simply increase even more.

Unless there are only a couple figures left in the game, it's easier to consider each figure's elevation advantage independently before comparing them.

For example, consider two scenarios. (A) you have a figure at elevation 4 and your opponent has one at 6. (B) you have a figure at elevation 1 and your opponent has one at 3. If these are the only two figures on the board, then these scenarios are equivalent and all you need to know is that his guy is two levels higher than yours. But if there are half a dozen or more figures on the board it becomes more complex. You're two lower than this guy, but two higher than that guy, so does that add to your IGPV, or subtract from it? Using absolute elevation makes it clearer.

Of course, since none of this is using actual numbers for IGPV, specifics like that don't really matter. Also, there are many other considerations that could impact this. (If you're not in range to attack or be attacked, then the elevation modifier to IGPV would be way smaller.) In practice you're just going to say to yourself "that fig is more/less valuable to me because of its elevation", and this can be applied either to your own figures, or to your opponent's.

[Aldin]

Great article, UPC - loved it the first time, loved it again just now. The concept of IGPV , correctly determined can easily spell the difference between victory and defeat. I would go so far as to propose that some units are ideal for creating maximum damage to high IGPV enemies. Braxas, for example, threatens a truly astounding number of hexes whenever she gets a turn and is often capable of threatening most of the small/medium figures fielded by an opponent. Understanding IGPV allows you to place her correctly for maximum devestation.

If you were to add an addendum it would be interesting to see your thoughts on how timed tournaments which score based on complete destruction of all the figures of any given card (the most common scoring as far as I know) affects the calculation of IGPV. My guess is that the IGPV of the wounded rises as the time deadline approaches, but I would be curious as to your thoughts.

~Aldin, who made a tactically unwise decision to target Marcus instead of more threatening Legionnaires once simply because he needed the 100 points

[TheRealQ]

My only qualm is in your stating that you can't cover every possible situation in forethought (paraphrasing). I haven't taken the time and sat down to evaluate a value for every circumstance but I do believe that it can be done. Values were able to be given to every chess piece with every possible layout possible...this is how they beat Kasparov. Its possible, but possibly not within the scope of the average scaper with only a few hours of gameplay available each week.

[Aldin]

Originally Posted by TheRealQ

My only qualm is in your stating that you can't cover every possible situation in forethought (paraphrasing). I haven't taken the time and sat down to evaluate a value for every circumstance but I do believe that it can be done. Values were able to be given to every chess piece with every possible layout possible...this is how they beat Kasparov. Its possible, but possibly not within the scope of the average scaper with only a few hours of gameplay available each week.

Now wait just one darned second! Chess has only 64 undifferentiated squares with a mere six types of units, a highly codified set of rules, a simple, unchanging goal and an obviously finite number of possible "on board" situations. Heroscape has vastly differing terrain conditions and maps - most of which have more than 64 spaces. It features almost twenty times the number of units with far more varied abilities. And the goals can be vastly different in different maps, groups, etc.

~Aldin, who thinks UPC had it right the first time

[Aldin]

Welcome to the boards, sylvrstorm!

On behalf of our height advantaged and point processing community I extend to you a laurel and a hearty handshake.

As a new member, you can begin your journey on the path to the fellowship, praise and respect of your Heroscapers peers by checking out this announcement: http://heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?t=6970

~Aldin, who notes that "i before e except after c" doesn't mean that the absence of a c requires the removal of the i and the e

[GIR]

Welcome to the boards!

Really cool article!