3 levels of Victory Cities

Proposed Victory Conditions based on points.
User avatar
elbowmaster
Posts: 1559
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:20 am
Location: "western boogerland"
Contact:

Post by elbowmaster » Tue Mar 15, 2005 12:08 am

Larry wrote:Flashman – I totally agree with you. Capital will not work as presented in the present system. Capitals will simply be worth more points. Adjoining VC should be avoided if possible.

User avatar
elbowmaster
Posts: 1559
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:20 am
Location: "western boogerland"
Contact:

Post by elbowmaster » Tue Mar 15, 2005 12:14 am

thoes426 wrote:Larry -
Ok, here my thoughts as of today.
Perhaps the original capture the capital victory should be listed as a Option in the rules and each combative power given x-number of "Key Cities" that must be occupied and held by an opponent(s) for x-turn(s).

Each Key City would in turn be assigned a Victory Point value based on it's significance both historically, strategically and economically.
i.e. all original "capital cities" would be the highest valued at 20.
The number of key cities would depend on the size of the players "empire".
Russia would be a beast to take out due to it's size just as Italy (if it makes final production) would be a "quick kill".
A balance of Key City/Victory Points could be come up with so that each side had just as many VP's as the other.

Depending on the time frame you start the game in some of these Key Cities may or may not begin the game ''enemy occupied".

I think this could be fun and open up new playing styles and strategies.

If this is what your wanting to create then i'm with you on it!

Thoes426 :twisted:

User avatar
elbowmaster
Posts: 1559
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:20 am
Location: "western boogerland"
Contact:

Post by elbowmaster » Tue Mar 15, 2005 12:18 am

Flashman wrote:Here is the result of my weekend map experiments - three maps based on Larry's suggested use of VCs.

Please note that the emphasis here is the location of Victory Cities rather than territorial boundaries.

http://boards.avalonhill.com/showthread.php?p=42997

User avatar
elbowmaster
Posts: 1559
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:20 am
Location: "western boogerland"
Contact:

Post by elbowmaster » Tue Mar 15, 2005 12:18 am

Imperious leader wrote:I like that Ostland territory, but the map is too similiar to revised, There should be about 40% more territories, more in eastern europe, italy, france, afrika, south east asia, Pacific islands, THink like a/a europe and a/a pacific combined with all the "in-between" territories to fill the gaps.

User avatar
elbowmaster
Posts: 1559
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:20 am
Location: "western boogerland"
Contact:

Post by elbowmaster » Tue Mar 15, 2005 12:20 am

Elessar wrote:Ok, first post for me.

Has Prague even been considered? It was of some importance to Germany, perhaps of more importance than several of the other mentioned. Also remember that Hitler sent forces to protect Prague even though the heartland of Germany was threatened.
(Of course, this depends on the division of territories as well, Prague may very well end up in the same territory as Berlin or Warsaw.)

The victory city on Sicily would be Palermo.

And even as a Norwegian, I would question the choice of Oslo. I don't think there's anything that suggests it should be a VC. I think Norway will be sufficiently important with a port.

User avatar
elbowmaster
Posts: 1559
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:20 am
Location: "western boogerland"
Contact:

Post by elbowmaster » Tue Mar 15, 2005 12:21 am

Guerrilla Guy wrote:Good Idea Elessar and welcome to Harris Game!

I think Praugue may be to close in proximity to Berlin and that is why it probably hasn't been mentioned.

GG :wink:

User avatar
elbowmaster
Posts: 1559
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:20 am
Location: "western boogerland"
Contact:

Post by elbowmaster » Tue Mar 15, 2005 12:21 am

Imperious leader wrote:
The victory city on Sicily would be Palermo.

And even as a Norwegian, I would question the choice of Oslo. I don't think there's anything that suggests it should be a VC. I think Norway will be sufficiently important with a port.
Ahh excellent post. Thank god we have a norwegian who doesnt want 40 seperate territories in Norway, and truely recognizes "oslo" for what it is. Palermo is a great site instead of , Italian east afrika. that way the allies dont bypass this when they invade italy, they follow instead a historical route.

User avatar
elbowmaster
Posts: 1559
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:20 am
Location: "western boogerland"
Contact:

Post by elbowmaster » Tue Mar 15, 2005 12:22 am

Larry wrote:I disagree about Oslo not being a good VC - As for Palermo/Sicily, I’d prefer to simply call it Sicily. Technically I guess such a VC (Victory City) would be Palermo. Yeah, call it Palermo. Sicily was already on my list of VC’s and it does force the Allies to not simply bypass the island. By the way… welcome aboard Elessar.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests