Play Balance Question

World in Flames is the computer version of Australian Design Group classic board game. World In Flames is a highly detailed game covering the both Europe and Pacific Theaters of Operations during World War II. If you want grand strategy this game is for you.

Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets

Post Reply
User avatar
76mm
Posts: 4765
Joined: Sun May 02, 2004 4:26 am
Location: Washington, DC

Play Balance Question

Post by 76mm »

Having played a couple Barbarossa games and currently reading the Annual 98, it seems clear that, especially in the global scenarios, a good player with mop the floor with a clueless noob. I'm curious what sort of handicapping was used with the board game, which of those are envisioned for inclusion in MWiF, and whether any new balance mechanisms are being contemplated.

I've seen references to tweaking resource levels, Victory Point levels, maybe a few others, but I was wondering whether players have considered giving weaker layers an additional action or two (in other words, in a land action, give the weaker player +1 rail and +1 air actions, etc.). Seems like this might be more useful to new players than a few more resources? Could also work for the AI...
User avatar
Jimm
Posts: 607
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 7:28 pm
Location: York, UK

RE: Play Balance Question

Post by Jimm »

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Having played a couple Barbarossa games and currently reading the Annual 98, it seems clear that, especially in the global scenarios, a good player with mop the floor with a clueless noob. I'm curious what sort of handicapping was used with the board game

Alchohol!
Jimm
User avatar
Magpius
Posts: 1679
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 11:21 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

RE: Play Balance Question

Post by Magpius »


Good question; Great answer.
Which player gets the booze?

"I don't believe in reincarnation because I refuse to come back as a bug or as a rabbit".
User avatar
LiquidSky
Posts: 2811
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:28 am

RE: Play Balance Question

Post by LiquidSky »



The game is self-handicapping as you are supposed to bid for countries. WiF is not really a two player game, and a rather poor solitaire game.

The bidding is based on numbers of Victory cities required for winning. As a fun result, there is usually allied 'friction' between the Germans/Italians and USA/CW. Friction that is sadly missing in a solitaire/2 player game.

“My logisticians are a humorless lot … they know if my campaign fails, they are the first ones I will slay.” – Alexander the Great
brian brian
Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 6:39 pm

RE: Play Balance Question

Post by brian brian »

ORIGINAL: LiquidSky

The game is self-handicapping as you are supposed to bid for countries. WiF is not really a two player game, and a rather poor solitaire game.

The bidding is based on numbers of Victory cities required for winning. As a fun result, there is usually allied 'friction' between the Germans/Italians and USA/CW. Friction that is sadly missing in a solitaire/2 player game.

The victory conditions really are designed for multi-player. In some groups, players on a side will compete for individual victory...there can also be friction between the Western Allies and the Russians, when the West invades the Baltic or the Balkans and ends up in front of the Russians...

in other groups, the sides cooperate completely, with no thought to individual victory
User avatar
AxelNL
Posts: 2389
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2011 12:43 pm
Location: The Netherlands

RE: Play Balance Question

Post by AxelNL »

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Having played a couple Barbarossa games and currently reading the Annual 98, it seems clear that, especially in the global scenarios, a good player with mop the floor with a clueless noob. I'm curious what sort of handicapping was used with the board game, which of those are envisioned for inclusion in MWiF, and whether any new balance mechanisms are being contemplated.

I've seen references to tweaking resource levels, Victory Point levels, maybe a few others, but I was wondering whether players have considered giving weaker layers an additional action or two (in other words, in a land action, give the weaker player +1 rail and +1 air actions, etc.). Seems like this might be more useful to new players than a few more resources? Could also work for the AI...

some optional rules are better for one or the other. That could help in that respect. Otherwise one could agree voluntarely on a build point cap.
Post Reply

Return to “World in Flames”