Como no actualicen el tema, en elnúltimo día son muy capaces de perder hasta la financiación mínima.
Serán capaz de arreglarlo?
May 22 2018Martin Wallace's update on rules & the Manassas HammerWell, that was a bit of a wild ride. Through a lot of playtesting by various parties in different parts of the world we have jointly come up with a number of rule changes and clarifications that will both fix the ‘Manassas Hammer’ and some other minor issues that really should not have been there in the first place.I will start with an apology. I’m really sorry that such issues still existed in a game this close to production. I could produce a long list of excuses why but the reality is that we, as a group, took our eye off of the ball: a valuable lesson for the future. Having said that, I am very pleased that PSC took the time and expense to produce advanced copies of the game so that these errors could come to light before final production.I am sure that some of you will worry that these rule changes will cause other issues that have not yet been spotted yet. I would like to take the time to reassure you that I do not think that this is the case in this game.My feeling is that many people are comparing the issues with ‘Lincoln’ with those in ‘A Few Acres of Snow’ and assuming that as the latter could not be satisfactorily ‘fixed’ then so for the former. The thing is, though, that they are very different games. The underlying mechanism in ‘Lincoln’ is a lot more robust than that in ‘A Few Acres of Snow’ and not subject to manipulation by extreme deck-thinning. In ‘Lincoln’ you actually do not want to thin your deck. This means that any strategy you have in mind depends on the cards you draw, thus denying you the degree of control required to employ that strategy.I would now like to spend some time explaining the thinking behind the main changes.The big fix is increasing the defence of Washington to +10. This change alone kills the ‘Manassas Hammer’. The Union player can happily ignore deploying in Washington for a number of turns, allowing him to apply pressure in other locations. You still have to be careful, but it is a lot harder for the South to take Washington by direct assault. Now they have to go the long way round, as they did historically.Initially I was in favour of reducing the first VP milestone to 1VP, but on reflexion felt that this took some of the tension out of the first third of the game. Adding 1VP to Fort Henry and Donelson gives the North extra options to achieve the first milestone.The rules for Naval Invasions were a little fuzzy. It has now be made clear that you can move multiple army counters in a single action as long as you expend one Navy card for each such move. This allows the North to plan an invasion of Savannah or New Orleans. This alone will bag you the 2VPs you need to survive the first draft, as long as you get your timing right.The Reinforcement benefit can now only be used by the defender and the moving counter has to be in an adjacent location. We have also reduced the number of these cards in the Confederate deck to one and added one to the Union deck. This means that the defender can potentially add five to their defence, which makes both sides nervous when attacking - I managed to pull off two ‘Gettysburgs’ with this card!The Rail Movement card has been amended so that you cannot use it offensively. This was mainly done to avoid a lot of rules over attacks from different directions.I’ve noticed that a number of people are concerned that the South can perform ‘mirror-moves’ to oppose the North wherever they build forces. In the game that I played this was not an issue. Now that the North does not have to maintain a high number of counters in Washington they have the freedom to move forces quickly to different locations to create a local superiority. Also, with the clarified Naval Invasion rules it is possible for the Union to outflank the South by sea. I see the game more like a Sumo wrestling match where each side seems balanced for a while but then one side will try to make a move which creates an imbalance. This then changes the nature of the game as forces become more dynamic and the possibility of errors increases.Generally these changes favour the North. The game balance is now about right, in that the South still have many ways to win the game, so are still in a powerful position, but are no longer able to get a ‘cheap’ win. The game is still tough for the North. You have to play a good game to make it to the first shuffle, but the odds of doing that are now much higher. Once you get to the first shuffle the balance of power begins to swing towards you as the Confederate deck becomes populated with useless cards and yours gets stronger.In my opinion the changes made by PSC completely fix the main problem. I know some of you will choose to remain on the fence until evidence from others proves otherwise, which is fine. I’m willing to stake my reputation on the fact that this is now the final product and is a good, balanced, fun game.Finally, I would like to commend all of those persons who have commented in the various forums on this game. It seems to me that the discussions generally remained polite, respectful, and on-point. Maybe there is hope for the internet yet!
Autor
Tema: (Leído 39436 veces)
Inicio
Foro
Ezine
Ingresar
Registrarse
Webchat
Ayuda