The Sanborn Oasis

WOK for Advanced Players

Moderators: Duke, trewqh, korexus

User avatar
Dameon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar Chapterhouse

The Sanborn Oasis

Post by Dameon » Mon Jan 31, 2005 9:09 pm

OK, not to risk flooding the community with available games, but I have recentely discovered a way to transfer files between my computer and the library computer I have been using for internet access. (A portable USB Zip drive, if you were wondering). Therefore, I am now able to actually run games again! It will take me a little extra time, and because of that I am only going to have one game open, but this game has been coming for a looong time and I am pretty excited about it.


http://www.angelfire.com/mo2/kaomaris/group36.html


If you go to the page, you can click on the Group # for the pop file, you can click on the "Sanborn Oasis" link for the rules (of course it's an X-Game!), and you can click on the main map to see an enlarged map of the keeps....it'll all make sense when you read the rules.

One goal of this game was to try to downplay the very common "if you have forests you have a huge edge" issue that is present in standard WOK 5 games. The upgrade element will still be there, of course, but it should not be as key of an aspect as it is in most games. In case you were wondering, the terrain surrounding the map is desert, and the little icons are cactii. I shuddered at the thought of filling in all those provinces with the dotted sand effect....no thanks!

If you have any questions feel free to either post them here or email me. I will run this game provided it fills in the next two weeks; I assume it will considering the rate at which Fredrik's and Wippo's games have been filling. If it doesn't I'll just take it down and bring it back when there's more of a demand, but I am optimistic that we should be able to fill this list now. At least all you WOK 5 addicts out there should be happy! :wink:
"A Knight is sworn to valor, his heart knows only virtue, his blade defends the helpless, his might upholds the weak, his word speaks only truth, his wrath outdoes the wicked."

User avatar
korexus
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2827
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Reading
Contact:

Post by korexus » Mon Jan 31, 2005 9:53 pm

Looks good, apart from one thing. Shared victory under the 6 city rule? That sounds uncomfortably low. Espeacially if it's no player without a city...

Otherwise it looks fun, I'd been trying to work changing province types into my next game. It looks like I'll have to do something else now...


korexus.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

User avatar
Xarfei
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 410
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 8:00 am
Location: Munich, Germany - The Scholars

Post by Xarfei » Mon Jan 31, 2005 10:49 pm

the link to the pop file does not work.

also is 59 connected to 70 / 64 connected to 69?

User avatar
korexus
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2827
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Reading
Contact:

Post by korexus » Tue Feb 01, 2005 1:09 am

Works for me...

While we're asking questions though, if I hold both middle provinces for 3 turns, then on the 4th someone takes one off me, can we share as the two of us combined have held them for 4 consecutive turns? I'd assume not, but after Tenaria I figure it's best to check...


korexus.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

User avatar
Xarfei
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 410
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 8:00 am
Location: Munich, Germany - The Scholars

Post by Xarfei » Tue Feb 01, 2005 1:19 am

Will the starting armies be placed in the outer province?
Is there goign to be a no headhuntig rule?
Can players choose tribes?

User avatar
Dameon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar Chapterhouse

Post by Dameon » Tue Feb 01, 2005 2:39 am

Korexus, to take a city you have to get past the three provinces that make it up. Combined, those three provinces have a defense of about 10 points including city and terrain bonuses, and they are all different terrains to boot. I really see it as quite difficult to take anybody's home keep. I am not against changing it to the 8-city rule if the majority of the players wish it though, I suppose I can ask once signups are complete.

Xarfei, the pop file works fine for me. Does anybody else have a similar problem to Xarfei? It might just be your browser or some such, I can email you a copy if you like just let me know. Your starting armies will start in the Commons (outermost province in the city), yes, and there will be no headhunting allowed as per my house rules. I am not allowing players to choose their tribe. Korexus, the answer to that is no. A player has to hold it for four consecutive turns. If you hold it for three and another player holds it for just one, that doesn't add up.

Also, and I added this clarification to the rules page, you cannot claim a shared victory if you hold only one vortex province for four rounds while the other changes hands. The shared victory condition is that you must be in an alliance with another player and that both of you hold the ENTIRE vortex for four consecutive rounds.
"A Knight is sworn to valor, his heart knows only virtue, his blade defends the helpless, his might upholds the weak, his word speaks only truth, his wrath outdoes the wicked."

BigJOzzy
Trooper
Trooper
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 7:00 am
Contact:

Post by BigJOzzy » Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:33 am

As always Nick you come up with great X-games.

Just reading through the rules I say as long as you have a few troops in the 'keep' and 'estate' and 'commons' no one will get in very easily. I don't think there will be a chance of winning this game by the 6 ciy rule even.

The big problem is the fight for the center square, and can anybody hold it for too long.

Warning for all that play this game, don't make NAPs that include not attacking if someone is holding the center square......or you will lose.

Massielita
Mathematician is someone who knows that if three people walk into an empty room and five people walk out, then two more people need to walk in to the room to make it empty again.

User avatar
korexus
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2827
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Reading
Contact:

Post by korexus » Tue Feb 01, 2005 12:45 pm

I agree that it will be harder to take a city than normal, but (one would hope) people will still die. If I kill 2 people and someone else kills w people, we could share a 6 city win. Also, cities being harder to take in the first place also makes them easier to keep once you have them, so a clan pair with 5 cities would be hard to stop.

I'd be more comfortable with 8 city, hell I'd be most comfortable with no shared win which is reliant only on territory (cities or vortices) but I doubt you'd agree to that.

At least with 8 city, there can't be a situation at the end where any given two of three remaining players can share the game. - That doens't sound like domination to me...
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

User avatar
Dameon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar Chapterhouse

Post by Dameon » Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:42 pm

Well, I am also operating under the assumption that to take somebody's city you are going to need to do something about their DEF first. The keep province itself gives something like 24 points of PDEF at maximum EFF, and that's tough to overcome even using upgraded units, especially when the defender may have some of his own. So, to take a city you'd need to do a number on it's DEF, which would make it easier to take again in the future.

I dunno, I am really not convinced that a 6 city rule would make the game too easy. As I said though, Kor, I'll ask the players once I have a full slate signed up and if they agree with you I am not against changing it to an 8 city rule, but one thing I will not do is get rid of the city victory entirely.
"A Knight is sworn to valor, his heart knows only virtue, his blade defends the helpless, his might upholds the weak, his word speaks only truth, his wrath outdoes the wicked."

User avatar
korexus
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2827
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Reading
Contact:

Post by korexus » Tue Feb 01, 2005 5:08 pm

I take your point about the DEF, but I imagine most people will group the bulk of their troops in one of the three city provinces, instead of spreading them between them so you'd still have two defensible provinces if you took one. - Could be wrong of course...

Also, I'd rather any issues were sorted out before the game filled. Anybody in a game is likely to prefer an option which makes a win easier as it effects everyone pretty much evenly. In fact, I believe that was the idea behing the X-Game forum in the first place. To make sure rules were balanced before a game opened. :wink:


korexus.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

User avatar
Lord Fredo
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 377
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: The Brotherhood of Vayuna - Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Post by Lord Fredo » Tue Feb 01, 2005 8:20 pm

Well, this sure looks like fun. Once again nice job Nick!
But I have to agree with Korexus about that 6 city rule. I don't even like the 8 city rule but I can cope with that one at least.
A question though. The vortex provinces, however unstable, can still contain POP workers, spies and so forth without any consequences no?

User avatar
Dameon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar Chapterhouse

Post by Dameon » Tue Feb 01, 2005 8:50 pm

I don't see any reason why they couldn't, Fredo. All I am going to do is change the terrain type between rounds, it shouldn't effect any resources you have there. Korexus, you've already signed up for the game so that to me signals that you'd be OK with a 6-city rule if the other players were happy with it. Massie for one said he think it's fine, and out of the four players I have officially signed up for the game the two of you are the only ones to comment on it either way. If players are not spreading their troops out throughout the city, then yeah, they probably will be defeated easier. You can't blame me if players play poorly can you? I dunno, I'm just not convinced that getting 6 cities in this particular game is going to be any easier than getting 8 cities in a regular WOK game. As I said though, if the majority of players would rather go with the 8-city rule, I'm willing to change....but your vote only counts if you are signed up for the game, needless to say.
"A Knight is sworn to valor, his heart knows only virtue, his blade defends the helpless, his might upholds the weak, his word speaks only truth, his wrath outdoes the wicked."

User avatar
korexus
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2827
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Reading
Contact:

Post by korexus » Tue Feb 01, 2005 11:38 pm

Nick, I'm perfectly fine with the 6 city rule if I'm in the game as I think it gives me a better shot at quick VPs. But objectively speaking I think the rule is unfair. I know we don't have an official rule on X-Games but the forum was opened so that people could discuss them before they opened. I believe the example given at the time was an X-Game in which the person who came first in the OOP for turn 1 won the game. Everyone in the game would be happy to play by those rules but that doesn't mean the game would be fair...


korexus.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

User avatar
Xarfei
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 410
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 8:00 am
Location: Munich, Germany - The Scholars

Post by Xarfei » Tue Feb 01, 2005 11:58 pm

How about having to own 7 cities?

?

?

....drunk......

Xarfei

User avatar
TK
Trooper
Trooper
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 7:00 am

Post by TK » Wed Feb 02, 2005 12:06 am

I think 6 cities is too low too.

User avatar
Donut
Warlord
Warlord
Posts: 1041
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 7:00 am
Location: Brew Town, WI; USA - BoV
Contact:

Post by Donut » Wed Feb 02, 2005 12:32 am

I guess for me it's not a matter of whether owning 6 cities is easy or not. It's a matter of whether the (potentially) "team" that owns 6 cities is the clear winner I think. It could come down to 1 player owning 3, another owning 3, and another player owning 4. In my opinion it's not necessarily true that the 2 players owning 3 each are the clear winner, and the same can be said about any combo.

I'm still debating on joining this game or not. 4 games is enough for me and my rating is low enough... But then again, how often do games open up?

Donut
The scars remind us that the past is real.

User avatar
Dameon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar Chapterhouse

Post by Dameon » Wed Feb 02, 2005 1:42 am

Really I will change it to 8-cities if that is the prevailing consensus. Korexus, I don't think the players in the game will just say "6 cities is great" if they feel the way you and TK do. Remember, the sword cuts both ways right? As I said, I promise a vote will be held once the official player list is full.
"A Knight is sworn to valor, his heart knows only virtue, his blade defends the helpless, his might upholds the weak, his word speaks only truth, his wrath outdoes the wicked."

User avatar
korexus
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2827
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Reading
Contact:

Post by korexus » Wed Feb 02, 2005 2:59 am

No. The sword doesn't cut both ways. That's my entire point!

Clearly you can't make a game which is heavily biased towards one specific player without some highly stupid rules, but you can make a game which awards "cheap VPs" in which case the sword works in favour of every player in the game. That is why I have been saying it shouldn't just be players in the game who get an input and that is why the X-Game forum was created in the first place!
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

BigJOzzy
Trooper
Trooper
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 7:00 am
Contact:

Post by BigJOzzy » Wed Feb 02, 2005 8:09 am

I am going to still disagree here with increasing the 6 city rule to 8. I think that will be the hard way to win. I think the easy way will be holding the two provinces for 4 rounds. Of course that will not be easy either, but no matter what I am predicting the game will last at least 25 rounds.

Massielita
Mathematician is someone who knows that if three people walk into an empty room and five people walk out, then two more people need to walk in to the room to make it empty again.

User avatar
TK
Trooper
Trooper
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 7:00 am

Post by TK » Wed Feb 02, 2005 1:08 pm

Massielita wrote:...no matter what I am predicting the game will last at least 25 rounds.

Not if TFF have two players in it. 8)

Post Reply