Game 757: frazzmac, wonderhero, SteveSmith, XManBG in SNAFU: Moonbase Assault

You are here: Stellar Forces > Your Games > Game 757: frazzmac, wonderhero, SteveSmith, XManBG in SNAFU: Moonbase Assault

• Very interesting mission but...I made one simulation:
  http://www.stellarforces.com/dsr/playbackapplet/playbackpage.cls?gid=788
  
  6 units destroyed 25 computers using SP30 pistol in one turn => 7 x 25 = 175 VPs
  Even if a side will take down all 6 undercover agents, will get maximum 13 x 5 + 50 = 115 VPs
  I know I made too much calculation and I spoiled the mystery of this mission but I think that must be rethought and bring some balance.
  So what do you think ?
  Posted by wonderhero 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• It's a good point. One thing I'm tempted to do with this mission is reduce it to 4 units per side to make it less crowded, and that would maybe solve the problem you describe. How does that sound?
  Posted by SteveSmith 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• From the previous games I've played I would say that's a good idea. :)
  Posted by Deadlime 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• Sorry but is not good. Look again at that simulation. Unit nr 1 destroyed 4 computers, nr. 2 got 5 computers, nr. 5 took 5 comp and nr. 4 got 4 comp.
  So 4 units took down 18 computers => 7 x 18 = 126 VPs
  
  VPs per computer destroyed must be reduced and/or the computers must not be so close to one another.
  Posted by wonderhero 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• You're probably right about the computers and VPs, but I would still prefer to see the number of units reduced. Consider that a seperate issue if you like. :)
  Posted by Deadlime 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• I don't have preferences. I agree with all you propose or prefer. I only want the balance that all. :)
  Posted by wonderhero 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• I've reduced the units to 4 per side. Any suggestions on the VPs per computer? Do they need reducing, as only 4 units would struggle to destroy that many computers in one turn.
  Posted by SteveSmith 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• As in the great traditions of science, it'll be best changing only one thing at a time. Let's have a game with 4 units then see if computers/VPs need tweaked.
  Posted by frazzmac 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• No way, I think you don't read what I wrote people! Watch the simulation!
  4 units can destroy IN ONE SINGLE TURN 18 computers => 7 x 18 = 126 VPs
  Even if a player will kill all 4 undercover agents, will get maximum 13 x 3 + 50 = 89 VPs << 126 VPs
  OK ?
  
  It's not so sample to make balance.
  The idea is that agents can gain victory in minimum 3-4 turns not one.
  The value of last killed agent must be greater than value of destroyed computers wich the agents can get in one turn.
  
  Now units are 4. OK.
  So it must increase the VPs per killed agent too, let's say from 13 to 20.
  So one player can get maximum 20 x 3 + 50 = 110 VPs from killing agents if the other players do nothing.
  If reduce the computer's value from 7 to 5 VPs you must NOT LET the agents to get more than 40 Vps per one turn.
  This mean maximum 5 x 8 = 40 VPs they can get per one turn. This mean each agent can destroy maximum 2 computers per turn.
  
  
  Proposal 1:
  
  Increase the value of killed agent from 13 to 20 VPs, for last one the same value 50 Vps
  Decrease computer's value from 7 to 5 VPs
  Reduce the no of computers from 37 to 25.
  Place maximum 2 computers per small room and maximum 2 computer close to one another.
  (So the agents can get maximum 5 x 8 = 40 VPs in one turn)
  
  Proposal 2:
  
  Increase the value of killed agent from 13 to 30 VPs and for last one from 50 to 70 VPs
  Decrease computer's value from 7 to 4 VPs
  (So the agents can get maximum 4 x 18 = 64 VPs in one turn)
  
  Proposal 3:
  
  Increase the value of killed agent from 13 to 25 VPs and last one from 50 to 60 Vps
  Decrease computer's value from 7 to 3 VPs
  (So the agents can get maximum 3 x 18 = 54 VPs in one turn)
  
  What you say ?
  Posted by wonderhero 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• Looks like I picked the wrong side! I thought XManBG was the saboteur! Well played Frazzmac. Wonderhero, you were right.
  Posted by SteveSmith 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• It's difficult to say without trying them out. Don't forget that if the saboteur side gets spotted shooting at a computer during their first "attack" turn, they will probably get anihilated the next turn, so they will probably only want to destroy a few computers each turn where they can get away with it.
  
  How about: Increase the value of killed agent from 13 to 25 VPs and last one from 50 to 60 Vps, and Decrease computer's value from 7 to 5 VPs. See how that goes?
  Posted by SteveSmith 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• I thought XManBG fancied taking on my role of saboteur, since he was busy causing an explosion and killing one of my units! I wondered if it was some kind of trick to flush me out.
  Posted by frazzmac 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• That was me; I did a sneaky kill which set off his death grenade and killed 3 units and a computer. Ooops.
  Posted by SteveSmith 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• Ah, I just watched the playback - I see now.
  Posted by frazzmac 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• Steve, in this situation, me as "uncover agents" I don't care if the others players see my actions in that crucial turn. Because I will get 18 x 5 VPs = 90 VPs
  If the next player will kill 2 or 3 of my agents I'll be the winner cause he will got 50 or 75 VPs and the other players the rest of VPs. So in the next turn he must kill all 4 agents (very hard task) or 0 or 1 agent. The next next player must kill the all 4 agents (hard task) or last 3 agents to win. If not than he must kill 0 or 1 agents depend on the previous player, otherwise I'll win. And so on.
  Come one, every body wants VPs so I will have 90% chance to win so easy.
  :)
  There're too much computers so close to one another!
  
  However change what you want Steve. Maybe for others players is very fine.
  cheers
  Posted by wonderhero 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• :)) Certainly he is the saboteur. I saw the Rocket Launcher in the hands of his agent previous turn. Only a saboteur take a rocket of course :)
  But he could trick us :)
  Posted by wonderhero 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• A rocket launcher is also an excellent way of ridding the world of saboteurs...so you never know!
  Posted by frazzmac 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• You are wrong, maybe you didn't read the mission's details.
  If launch a rocket you'll have a great chance to kill "innocent" units of the other players and bring penalties to your score more than you got from killed agent.
  
  I don't know why I didn't kill your agents when I saw your rocket launcher because if you whouldn't have been saboteur you hadn't any reason to trick us.
  
  well played
  Posted by wonderhero 15 years ago [Login to reply]



• True, but today I changed the mission so that the saboteur needs to get 100 VPs to win. If they don't, then the highest VPs out of all the other players wins.
  Posted by SteveSmith 15 years ago [Login to reply]

This topic has now been closed.

Email Address:

Password:

Forgotten your password?

Register using the Android or PC app