We sort of just eyeball it. If a capital is taken we will play for a few more rounds. Sometimes it’s fun to play even if you know a team has lost. It’s fun to make a huge stack of battleships and pound the crap out of Japan, or UK.
@Guerrilla:
All my games are 9 pointers now for the following reasons:
1. I usually don’t have more then 4-5 Hours and a 10 VC game for a group I typically play with is like a 8-10 hour game…
2. Axis Victory and Allied Victory is usually achieved with a balanced buy in the sense that you must get a good build in order to win…
3. More fun imo…as far as different VC’s consider:
Hawaii (instead of San Fransisco)
Canberra (Instead of Calcutta)or try more VC’s:
Canberra
Hawaii
Vladivstok (Soviet Far East)
Cairo
Rio De Janerio (Brazil)
Baku (Novorbisk)GG
Isn’t Baku the capital of Azerbaijan? So wouldn’t it be located in Caucauses?
your correct… I didn’t know any “cities” that would fit it so I used Baku… If you can think of any please post them!
GG
Just stick with the most well known city in that area… Krasnoyarsk
Personally, I do not like the concept of Victory Cities. I find that strategies become designed to take a key city in order to win, even if it puts them in a precarious situation in the rest of the world.
The Avalon Hill Game, Third Reich, had a rule that if the Allies landed in Italy, there was a 1 in 3 change of Italy surrenduring all troops. The Allied player would gamble everything to attempt the invasion in hopes to get lucky on the Surrender. Of course, the loss of all of the Italian based units would cripple the Germans.
The same can happen if a team only requires one more city to win the game.
As for survival after fallen capitals, anything can happen.
If a player has the will to keep playing, then play on. Unless, of course, you wish to surrender.
we have always played until someone concedes defeat. there is no point putting a player through the agony of “rolling it out”
we have always played until someone concedes defeat. there is no point putting a player through the agony of “rolling it out”
Some people love it when they have MASSIVE armies against each other…
If one is ready to collapse? they start building inf over and over again.
So, in this case it would be possible to look at 40 infantry to take over UK… :roll: :|
I only know of such games, but never played one like that before.
We always stop when it’s getting pretty obvious :-P
So, we never play VC’s any more! We just play untill someone resigns.
once the initiative has clearly passed someone will buckle. At that point, admit you have lost/won, shake and hands and make plans for a future game.
the victory cities, i think are a lack of play testing by the creators.
I don’t know about that, I think it was a way to make the victory conditions more acheaveable to the Axis.
you should be able to size up the board and realize you have lost. once your chance has passed you are painfully “rolling out.”
you should be able to size up the board and realize you have lost. once your chance has passed you are painfully “rolling out.”
yep, that’s what I’m thinking, too.
the trouble is: some people like to see this “rolling out”
When I play the cpu on triplea, i usually play a 12 city game, just cause its fun, and it dosen’t take as long. Besides a Japan that makes more that 100 ipc a turn is just a ton of fun. 2 battleships a turn baby. Just because I can!
When I play the cpu on triplea, i usually play a 12 city game, just cause its fun, and it dosen’t take as long. Besides a Japan that makes more that 100 ipc a turn is just a ton of fun. 2 battleships a turn baby. Just because I can!Â
that’s true…
the cpu doesn’t have the problem of looking at your massive buys, while he is in agony about the very few and little moves he can do next.
I love it, too :-P
When i play face to face, my oponets are intelegent enough to know when they have lost. We usually say we are playing to 10 cities (the point of no return for most games) but we rarely get there. There is usually some battle that so changes the face of the game that everyone knows who won and lost. It’s a bit more like the victory conditions in real war anyway. You keep fighting till someone wants to quit.
there is always “that guy” who insists on playing when the game has cleary passed.
Hey guys, after long delay I’m back - hiya. I’ve tried 10, 9, and 8 victory cities, and I think I prefer the 8, it gives the Axis the best chance of victory providing they snatch up Calcutta and Leningrad, but it’s not outside the Allies range to really reinforce the hell out of at least Leningrad, making the game really interesting. Usually as Axis I focus on holding my own and again the two before mentioned cities, whereas as Allies I usually concede Calcutta is gone, and concentrate on either the three German territories (Germany first policy), or retaking Calcutta, and grabbing Kwangtung and Philipines (Japan first policy). The games are always pretty exciting, and never go too long - there’s always last ditch grabs at cities to prevent the end of the game, and they often work.
By the way guys, why is it whenever people consider putting a Victory City in Australia, they call it Canberra? Shouldn’t it be Darwin, the only Australian city that was actually bombed?
I thought of an interesting game adaptation, I would put it in another section, but it fits a little better with this thread though. I’ve seen alot of suggestions for other victory cities - but the problem is I like the 8 to 9 city dynamic. So, why not make a list of about 25ish cities, put them in a hat, and pull out 12 of them at random. It wouldn’t be close to historically correct, but it’d always make for an interesting game. Just be sure that both teams can agree on the outcome. Now that I think about it, you’d have to do two mixes, one for axis and one for allied territories, but that’d be okay.
8 VC is an Axis win, PERIOD.
Allies cannot hold Karelia and India against a concerted Axis push, nor can the Allies take any of the Axis VC’s before both of those Allied VC’s fall. Maxium game length: 2 full turns with 8 VC.
Them’s fightin’ words! I offer to you a challenge!
If you want to test the 8 VC theory, I think I have enough time left to get in 2 turns before the next round of the Tournament.
If you really want to test this, let me know. I’ll of course take the Axis, and we’ll do a bid equivalent to what is currently pretty standard int he Tournament (6 IPC to the Axis), and I’ll place it as I have in the last several test matches:
Bid placement with bid 1 INF in Belorussia, 2 IPC to Germany, 1 IPC to Japan.
My DAAK ID is the same as my user name here.
We play to 8 VC’s for victory in order to test your theory on the Allies holding Karelia and India…
Do you have an instant messaging program? If it’s only a few turns this’ll be the quickest way.
