Match ending question

[roboshmoo]

For vp porposes what happens if you completely wipe out your opponent's crew on say the 4th turn, but you have not completed your objectives yet and they are ahead in vps.

Does the game just stop and you are assumed to have gotten them all or do you finish out the turns with just 1 player and see if you are able to achieve your objectives to win before turn 6 ends?

[Justin]

For vp porposes what happens if you completely wipe out your opponent's crew on say the 4th turn, but you have not completed your objectives yet and they are ahead in vps.

Does the game just stop and you are assumed to have gotten them all or do you finish out the turns with just 1 player and see if you are able to achieve your objectives to win before turn 6 ends?

Rules as written, one player plays the remainder of the game to see if he accomplishes enough VPs to win.

But in real life, both players will agree he won after he wiped his opponent.

[Lucidicide]

For vp porposes what happens if you completely wipe out your opponent's crew on say the 4th turn, but you have not completed your objectives yet and they are ahead in vps.

Does the game just stop and you are assumed to have gotten them all or do you finish out the turns with just 1 player and see if you are able to achieve your objectives to win before turn 6 ends?

I believe you play the game out until its conclusion even though you have no opponent.

[morespam]

I think thats how it is supposed to be done (played out with 1 player or just elect the player who wiped out the other team the winner) but we have house ruled it because we don't like "killing the other team" being an overriding way of wining the game.

We say that once the other team is wiped out the player still on the table has one more turn to tie up as many VP as he can and then the game ends and VP are counted up.

I think this keeps crews more focused on their objectives throughout the game rather then just killing the other team then doing the objective unopposed (whats the fun in that).

We have only played 25ss games and I don't think any game has gone past turn 5 (except one game where we where forested) befor one team has been completely wiped out... this might change in bigger games so it might be less of a problem.

[tenabrae]

This can happen in most wargames... Usually where i'm from you just figure out what the player could achieve in the remaining turns and figure the points out (should be pretty obvious whether the player can achieve the rest of his objectives in the remaining turn or two).

[Q'iq'el]

Rules as written, one player plays the remainder of the game to see if he accomplishes enough VPs to win.

But in real life, both players will agree he won after he wiped his opponent.

I would never agree to that. Having to grab objectives in an objective-oriented game is a great balancing factor and something far more interesting than a mere slaughter (and we have the Slaughter Strategy for that too ).

If someone plays a desperate suicidal fight to accomplish his objectives and thwart the opponent at the same time, then he wins even if he's wiped out.

If turn 5 & 6 is enough for the remaining player to claim his objectives, all the better for him. But chances are it won't be and if he fails to get his objectives despite wiping out the opponent, he lost. I agree with Tenabrae that if you can figure the outcome without playing these 2 turns, that's fine to stop it there.

Even if you can't, two turns with few remaining models, where the main focus will be movement anyway (claiming terrain features, moving into quarters, trying to get the treasure to the deployment zone etc.) go in fraction of time of a normal turn and you can run through them real quick.

The point is, more often than not it is more important to focus on objectives than on killing opponent. If killing opponent was a guaranteed victory, some teams would become unbalanced and the entire system would suffer greatly (for example, taking a bunch of small and very fast models for Reconnoiter or Treasure Hunt would stop being viable if opponent could win by focusing on hunting your crew). As is, the opponent has to focus majority of his attention on objectives (or blocking your objectives) and rarely has the luxury of engaging his full crew in combat.

Edited May 24, 2010 by Q'iq'el

[morespam]

@tenabrae Yeh I know, and they just turn into slug fests.

I really enjoy the objectives system of Malifaux so we use that 1 turn rule stop objectives becoming an after thought in a game, also feel it makes each game different and requires more decisions.

But I guess its up to the players as to what sort of game they want.

On a slightly related note I am hoping they release a campaign type system (maybe this henchmen thing?) because that will help allot as you will want to win the game with as little casualties as possible.

[tenabrae]

Once you start playing higher points you'll probably find the slaughter doesn't happen as much (except when that's the mission )

Having said that at 25ss/box set, we eliminate recon because it's almost impossible with crews that small (espcecially with insignificant models).