Jump to content
GhostofNobodyInParticular

Republic At War Rules/OC Conversation

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

Military forces cannot be loaned or trade hands. They are always in the creating player's control. However, if enough people insist, I may allow ground forces to be transported by allies. That does however require more bookkeeping, in that I will have to keep track of which GF belong to whom. The reason I am not allowing military forces to change hands is that it enables players to simply build and then hand over to their allies, thereby hardly even playing the game.

OH... I did not get this memo... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

GNIP - if a planet is captured we will need you to let us know if it DOUBLE BUILT the turn it was captured.

Just as a friendly reminder.

Edited by LTD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LTD said:

GNIP - if a planet is captured we will need you to let us know if it DOUBLE BUILT the turn it was captured.

Just as a friendly reminder.

Ah, yes, good point.

2 hours ago, LTD said:

GNIP - are you letting us transport allied GF? Asking for a friend...

No. I want each player to have a balanced involvement in the battles. If transporting allies is allowed, then those with Training Grounds/Droid Factories would just spend their credits to pump out CF/DF, and their fleets would atrophy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

Military forces cannot be loaned or trade hands. They are always in the creating player's control. However, if enough people insist, I may allow ground forces to be transported by allies. That does however require more bookkeeping, in that I will have to keep track of which GF belong to whom. The reason I am not allowing military forces to change hands is that it enables players to simply build and then hand over to their allies, thereby hardly even playing the game.

In past games we've been allowed to just give units to another player by sending the unit to a planet owned by that player and having it surrender. From a player's perspective, that worked well and I hope it wasn't too hard on the GM. That might be easier than having to keep track of whose GF are on whose ships. 

Also, it allows us to have "roles" on each side; banker, army, navy, etc. Personally I think this allows for a fun twist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, FortyInRed said:

In past games we've been allowed to just give units to another player by sending the unit to a planet owned by that player and having it surrender. From a player's perspective, that worked well and I hope it wasn't too hard on the GM. That might be easier than having to keep track of whose GF are on whose ships. 

Also, it allows us to have "roles" on each side; banker, army, navy, etc. Personally I think this allows for a fun twist

True, but last games there were no teams, which meant everybody was forced to be balanced to survive. No player could only build GF and hope to win a 1vAll. Here, the burden of building ships for that player is passed to a team mate, which makes everybody only doing one thing. 

Granted, there are games where such a thing exists (The African Campaign[North African Campaign?] as an example), but this has not nearly that scale or complexity. If enough people think it would be fun, I'll allow it, as there is no point enforcing a Rule that reduces the fun for the players, but I believe it is necessary to add a level of complexity and careful thinking/planning to the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

True, but last games there were no teams, which meant everybody was forced to be balanced to survive. No player could only build GF and hope to win a 1vAll. Here, the burden of building ships for that player is passed to a team mate, which makes everybody only doing one thing. 

 

Is that a bad thing though? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

In my opinion. And as it is only an opinion (having done no research on it), I am willing to change it if at least half the players (and not all from one side) vote in favor of doing so.

That's fair, I vote to change it! But if we decide not to I will rest my case... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too vote to allow transfer of units and credits between players. 

I say "players" and not "teams" here intentionally. Though nothing comes to mind right now, if a situation requires a credit transfer between players (the price of a peace treaty?) I'm ok with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...