Do you want a Team Victory Possibility?

[Hawk_]

I think individual games are great. However they can have one weakness. That is players sometimes team up with people they have known from past games.


The team game scenario offers people without as many player contacts an equal playing field.

Team games are also a good way to introduce new players because veterans will be more likely to help a new teammate. In the individual game new players become a greater target.

Regardless of the scenario I am looking forward to playing.

Just my 2 cents

Hawk

[Lord Diamond]

I think individual games are great. However they can have one weakness. That is players sometimes team up with people they have known from past games.


The team game scenario offers people without as many player contacts an equal playing field.

Team games are also a good way to introduce new players because veterans will be more likely to help a new teammate. In the individual game new players become a greater target.

Regardless of the scenario I am looking forward to playing.

Just my 2 cents

Hawk

There is nothing wrong with players teaming up with whomever they like. I have no problem with the concept of teams and alliances. It's the fact that those teams would be pre-determined that bothers me.

In an individual game, players can form alliances but only one win. I might work with you and even help you out, but I won't make major sacrifices for you. You can't have my artifact and I don't owe you anything.

[paway]

I think individual games are great. However they can have one weakness. That is players sometimes team up with people they have known from past games.


The team game scenario offers people without as many player contacts an equal playing field.

Team games are also a good way to introduce new players because veterans will be more likely to help a new teammate. In the individual game new players become a greater target.

Regardless of the scenario I am looking forward to playing.

Just my 2 cents

Hawk

There is nothing wrong with players teaming up with whomever they like. I have no problem with the concept of teams and alliances. It's the fact that those teams would be pre-determined that bothers me.

In an individual game, players can form alliances but only one win. I might work with you and even help you out, but I won't make major sacrifices for you. You can't have my artifact and I don't owe you anything.

While I prefer individual victory conditions, I can understand Hawk's concern.

In my experience with Hyborian War, players develop relationships through the course of many games and begin allying with the same players each game, as well as holding grudges against other players and working against them each game. This can have a negative effect on the game over time, almost like bullying, if you know that a group of players is going to band together and eliminate the competition one at a time.

We might discover that down the road, alliance victory conditions are desirable as it will require people to form new relationships and will provide new players with an instant alliance against established cliques.

I'd prefer to wait and see how these games play out, though.

[Lord Diamond]

Here in Fall of Rome I believe that we have avoided the worst of that. I am friends with some of the players and we have often had times where we were bitter enemies in one game and close allies in another.

It is my opinion that the subscription plans will help take some of that out of the equation. After all, since you aren't paying by the turn, there is no reason to feel genuine anger wen somebody ruins your long-laid, and expensive, plans. I hope so anyway.

[Kalrex]

I can say personally I'll be taking a game by game approach and 0 interest in always having same ally/enemy and frankly I'd be happy to just do my own thing more often than not anyways.