Capturing and controlling hexes

[Daxx]

You could start off with none of them on the map, and have the players build them as the game progresses. This way, it ties in with the concept of land ownership that was previously proposed, and also with the ability for an element to capture territory. You could even spend money so that your personal castle/fort/whatever has a wider influence. And when another element tries to siege and capture a fort, it becomes that much more personal.

[Scaredgirl]

Yes, too many cities is a problem. Thats why we have - forts! 

Say they are a bit easier to siege then actual towns (wall easier to break, NPC garrison is easier etc). Gives some practice for attackers before they go for the real thing.
As for placing them on the map, they dont have to have special buildings inside. They can as well be treated as Flag-points on the map.

Yes, this is probably the best way to go.

You could start off with none of them on the map, and have the players build them as the game progresses. This way, it ties in with the concept of land ownership that was previously proposed, and also with the ability for an element to capture territory. You could even spend money so that your personal castle/fort/whatever has a wider influence. And when another element tries to siege and capture a fort, it becomes that much more personal.

I thought about this but maybe it's better to have some towns there when we start. I think that building a Castle/Fortress should cost tons of money, and no player shouldn't be even close to having that kind of cash during the early rounds.

Without any default towns, doing stuff like buying new cards would be more difficult during early rounds.

[Kael Hate]

Regarding Capturing of Hexes.

If a Hex is controlled Already, a non-ally presense there will neutralise the hex.
If a hex is Neutral then it should be claimed.

Unaligned / Underworld elementals can't claim hexes but can neutralise them.

This procedure stops opponents running through claiming everything they touch and gives the previous owner 1 turn to protect their asset, but does not slow down uncontested capture too significantly.

[Scaredgirl]

Regarding Capturing of Hexes.

If a Hex is controlled Already, a non-ally presense there will neutralise the hex.
If a hex is Neutral then it should be claimed.

Unaligned / Underworld elementals can't claim hexes but can neutralise them.

This procedure stops opponents running through claiming everything they touch and gives the previous owner 1 turn to protect their asset, but does not slow down uncontested capture too significantly.

I like this. When I think about it, this is exactly how it works in many real-time strategy games, you first neutralize, then capture.

[Daxx]

I'm still a fan of requiring people to spend 1AP on their hex capture, if only so that it makes life simpler for the organsiers - they can go through the list of moves rather than having to double check where everyone is on the map.

Also now that players have 3AP a turn it's not as big a handicap as it was.

[Scaredgirl]

I'm still a fan of requiring people to spend 1AP on their hex capture, if only so that it makes life simpler for the organsiers - they can go through the list of moves rather than having to double check where everyone is on the map.

Also now that players have 3AP a turn it's not as big a handicap as it was.

Potential issue with it costing 1AP is that since it benefits the whole team and not an individual player, players might not want to waste their AP doing this.

We could give player 1+XP if they capture a hex, but that might lead to exploiting.

[Kael Hate]

I'm still a fan of requiring people to spend 1AP on their hex capture, if only so that it makes life simpler for the organsiers - they can go through the list of moves rather than having to double check where everyone is on the map.

Also now that players have 3AP a turn it's not as big a handicap as it was.

Potential issue with it costing 1AP is that since it benefits the whole team and not an individual player, players might not want to waste their AP doing this.

We could give player 1+XP if they capture a hex, but that might lead to exploiting.

Lets put it int the middle and make theplayer record it in their action steps as a 0AP action.
- its now in the list of moves as Daxx Wanted
- Costs nothing to the player as SG wanted

ya?

[Daxx]

I'm still a fan of requiring people to spend 1AP on their hex capture, if only so that it makes life simpler for the organsiers - they can go through the list of moves rather than having to double check where everyone is on the map.

Also now that players have 3AP a turn it's not as big a handicap as it was.

Potential issue with it costing 1AP is that since it benefits the whole team and not an individual player, players might not want to waste their AP doing this.

That's probably a good thing. The teams who can sort out their teamwork will perform better, and it allows people who want to benefit their element more than themselves to make that tradeoff.

Plus, we can quite easily have quests to offset the lack of direct personal gain.

[Scaredgirl]

I'm still a fan of requiring people to spend 1AP on their hex capture, if only so that it makes life simpler for the organsiers - they can go through the list of moves rather than having to double check where everyone is on the map.

Also now that players have 3AP a turn it's not as big a handicap as it was.

Potential issue with it costing 1AP is that since it benefits the whole team and not an individual player, players might not want to waste their AP doing this.

We could give player 1+XP if they capture a hex, but that might lead to exploiting.

Lets put it int the middle and make theplayer record it in their action steps as a 0AP action.
- its now in the list of moves as Daxx Wanted
- Costs nothing to the player as SG wanted

ya?

Problem is not only Action Points, it's also the increased amount of communication needed.

The core of WoE design: How to make the event so that everything happens "automatically", without a player doing something that requires the organizers to read what the player is doing, and then updating something.

Option A: If capturing a hex is done by using an action, someone (probably a mover) has to read that action and either update the map himself, or inform a 3rd person about this. This is bad because it's tons of more work.

Option B: If capturing a hex is done by simply standing on a hex, no communication between the player and the organizer is needed. The organizer can simply look at the map with all the players, and change control accordingly.

Option B would be awesome if not for one problem: Peace and Alliances.

Option B doesn't take into consideration whether or not you actually want to control that particular hex, which is a problem. The organizer could of course keep track of diplomatic relations, but that might lead to human errors.

If someone has a perfect solution for this, please let me know.

[ZephyrPhantom]

Hmm... perhaps this problem should be attacked from the view of a TBS instead an RTS.  This has capturing a hex happen by simply standing on it.

If both parties of space are at Peace / Allied, then moving into said territory will not alter control at all.
If both parties of space are Neutral, control goes to the most dominant elemental (aka most players of that element there).  Prescence of adjacent controlled hexes gives an element +1 player at select hex per adjacent control.
If both parties are at War, then a battle starts for control of the hex. Neutral parties to both sides can choose to A.  Stay there B. Escape to adjacent hexes.  If you stay there, there may be some sort of conflict where you are supposed to fight as well.
If one party wins the war, the winners stay and the losers are retreated out into Neutral/Allied hexes 3 spaces away from contested hex.  The hex then becomes Neutral.

[Daxx]

If a player wants to capture a hex, they must update a thread. The organiser can simply consult the thread for the capture actions that were performed that round. If they don't update the thread, they don't get the hex. That way, whilst there is communication involved, the onus is totally on the players to communicate.

[Scaredgirl]

Hmm... perhaps this problem should be attacked from the view of a TBS instead an RTS.  This has capturing a hex happen by simply standing on it.

If both parties of space are at Peace / Allied, then moving into said territory will not alter control at all.
If both parties of space are Neutral, control goes to the most dominant elemental (aka most players of that element there).  Prescence of adjacent controlled hexes gives an element +1 player at select hex per adjacent control.
If both parties are at War, then a battle starts for control of the hex. Neutral parties to both sides can choose to A.  Stay there B. Escape to adjacent hexes.  If you stay there, there may be some sort of conflict where you are supposed to fight as well.
If one party wins the war, the winners stay and the losers are retreated out into Neutral/Allied hexes 3 spaces away from contested hex.  The hex then becomes Neutral.

That would probably work but unfortunately it's way too complex. We need a really simple system.

If a player wants to capture a hex, they must update a thread. The organiser can simply consult the thread for the capture actions that were performed that round. If they don't update the thread, they don't get the hex. That way, whilst there is communication involved, the onus is totally on the players to communicate.

What does "update a thread" mean?