| The One Ring http://test.one-ring.co.uk/ |
|
| Three-sided battles? http://test.one-ring.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=28025 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Morbag_the_Orc [ Tue Feb 25, 2014 6:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Three-sided battles? |
So, is there any rules for fighting battle that consists three sides? There was article in WD about fighting three-sided battles in Warhammer few years back I think. It could be interesting to have example gratia Elves vs. Men vs. Mordor or something like that. Opinions? |
|
| Author: | legion [ Tue Feb 25, 2014 6:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Three-sided battles? |
Three way battles are actually very difficult to pull off correctly, especially in a standard death match. Generally either one player will be ganged up on, one player will hang back and wait, or all the players wont rush in to fight. This always creates a sour match where someone is unfairly beaten out of the game. The best way to have a three way is not in a standard match but instead one with objectives like Killing a king, capturing objectives, etc. |
|
| Author: | Morbag_the_Orc [ Tue Feb 25, 2014 7:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Three-sided battles? |
Yep, I agree that its usually ends up to ganging against one side. Hmm needs more thinking... |
|
| Author: | Zirak-Zigil [ Tue Feb 25, 2014 8:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Three-sided battles? |
The guys over on the GBHL youtube channel did a three way batrep video. It was a treasure seeking game among the citadel of Cirith Ungol. The way they played it might give you some ideas for your game? Here is a link to that vid if you haven't seen it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htgRRhFOpdY&feature=c4-overview-vl&list=PLWFbeAG_fgZOrzcO4tZ-FQqRXy8ytdNcs Hope that helps |
|
| Author: | JamesR [ Tue Feb 25, 2014 8:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Three-sided battles? |
I have played several 3-sided games and always enjoyed them. You have to make sure the board set-up has equal distance between each player. There will be some areas where inevitably there will be 2 on 1 but the whole thing can easily work out well |
|
| Author: | VandalCabbage [ Tue Feb 25, 2014 9:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Three-sided battles? |
I once played a six-sided battle, 250 points each. I had a great time. If you want to do larger than two player battles I would suggest making the armies small and using even numbers of sides. |
|
| Author: | pokyha [ Tue Feb 25, 2014 11:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Three-sided battles? |
Three sided battles are always fun, I haven't played it with LOTR but with other games. What happens is the strongest player get bashed by 2 players until he is weaked then the next strongest player gets bashed by 2 players. It makes for a very even game where the outcome will always be close. You have to make sure that the players start evenly away from each other, so one player does not get a huge advantage. |
|
| Author: | templar_tony [ Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Three-sided battles? |
Over on westgamers we have a fairly rock solid set of 3-way battle rules posted up for use. On going debate as to nitty-gritty of kill points but for the most part its balanced chaos. In Perth Aus we tend to have a bit trouble all trying to find other players so this has been a recent solution so as many people can get a game on a regular basis. Three Player Scenario: The Battle of Three Armies Lord of the Rings / The Hobbit Strategy Battle Game LAYOUT Set up terrain as described in the rule book and agree which edge of the battlefield will count as North. Place an objective marker in the centre of the battlefield. STARTING POSITIONS At the battle’s start, the forces have yet to arrive – models are not deployed at the start of the game. PRIORITY All players roll a D6 before each turn. The player with the highest result has Priority, the player with the second highest roll goes second and the third highest goes third. Any equal scores should be rerolled between the players who drew (regardless of who went first last turn). OBJECTIVES Once one force has been broken, the game might suddenly end. At the end of each turn after this condition has been met, roll a D6. On a result of 1-2, the game ends – otherwise, the battle continues for another turn. At the end of the game, the force that has scored the most Victory Points wins the game. Victory Points are scored for the following: • You score 10 Victory Points if you have the most models within 6” of the centre of the objective. • You score 3 Victory Points if you have any models within 6” of the centre of the objective. • You score 1 Victory Point for each enemy model you have killed, and 3 Victory Points for each enemy leader. Keep the casualties each player causes separate from one another. SPECIAL RULES Tumult of Battle: After all players have completed their Movement Phases, in order of Priority each player takes it in turns to roll a D6 for one of their warbands not on the battlefield and consult the chart below. The warband’s captain can use Might to alter the roll. Models can’t charge in the turn they arrive but otherwise act normally exactly as if it was their Move. The player with Priority must roll for a single warband and deploy the models in the warband. Then the second player in Priority order rolls for one of theirs and deploys it, and the final player rolls for one of theirs. Continue in this order until all players have rolled for all warbands not already on the battlefield. Warbands yet to arrive count as being on the battlefield for the purposes of determining if your force is broken. D6 Result 1 - The warband does not arrive yet 2 - The opponent who is next in Priority order chooses a point with space for the models to arrive at least 6” from a corner – all models in the warband move onto the battlefield from this point. If you are 3rd in Priority, this opponent will be the player who was 1st. 3 - The opponent who was before you Priority order chooses a point with space for the models to arrive at least 6” from a corner – all models in the warband move onto the battlefield from this point. If you are 1st in Priority, this opponent will be the player who is 3rd. 4 - You choose a point on the north or south board edge, at least 6” from a corner – all models in the warband move onto the battlefield from this point. 5 - You choose a point on the east or west board edge, at least 6” from a corner – all models in the warband move onto the battlefield from this point. 6 - You choose a point on any board edge, at least 6” from a corner – all models in the warband move onto the battlefield from this point. ALL CREDIT to Mattshadowlord for authorship Link to source thread Three Player Scenario:The Battle of Three Armies http://www.westgamer.com/forum/viewtopi ... 82&t=27048 |
|
| Author: | Sithious [ Wed Feb 26, 2014 2:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Three-sided battles? |
I think it would be interesting to see rules for this type of battle. I would have trouble understanding the gang up mentality. if all three players consider the opposing players as enemy. I am picturing it as this; Then if player A moves into combat with player B, then player C moves into the same combat, he should not be able to choose which enemy he is fighting, it should be all three roll off for fight, then the winner has to choose which enemy he strikes, the other two are both losers of the fight and don't strike. So therefor you cannot have a gang-up, only 1 of the 3 players is ever a winner of combat. So even if one player ends up in more combats from both other players hitting flanks, he still is only fighting one player at a time in each individual combat. And one enemy can decide to strike the other enemy anyway and thus it is equal. Perhaps it could even be a roll to see who takes strikes. ? A lost combat is a lost combat, weather it was one player or four, but oinly 1 of those players is producing strikes. That is how I see it. A gang up would be that Player A moves into combat with player B, player C joins in and both player A and C shake hands in a false alliance and then for that combat are on the 'same side' and then win and both strike player B... That should be against the rules as it is not at all fair. Is that right? |
|
| Author: | Bilbo [ Wed Feb 26, 2014 4:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Three-sided battles? |
I used to play them on a regular basis, particularly Mordor, Isenguard and Gondor. It really was no trouble at all and worked well. It tended to happen as part of my gaming groups use of Mighty Empires! |
|
| Author: | JamesR [ Wed Feb 26, 2014 5:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Three-sided battles? |
@Sitheous that's one way to play it. Out happens far less than I think people anticipate if you're all equidistant apart. One way we've done it is a succession of duels. Player A fights B first as he was charged by him first, then he fights player C (after wounds are resolved) as the charge occurred later in real time so it makes for good cinematics, the elf dueling and striking down the orc before facing the charging Uruk |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|