When it is decided who is playing who, one player takes the lead as the 'home' army. They decide on the mission and battlefield and order of deployment, but must publish their army in full. The second player must abide by the 'home' player's choices but gets the advantage of arriving with an unknown force, cherry-picked for the battlefield, mission, deployment order and army chosen by their opponent.
This might not suit all, but it is perhaps an interesting alternative every now and again.
I do not mind trying this.
ReplyDeleteJoe is one who it would not suit as, being a teenager, he will not create an army until the last possible second.
I think all missions should be decided before building an army as it prevents the disappointment of an uphill battle.
Also, if you know an opponents army, you can bring a suitable army to play against it. You do not need to bring an army to crush it, as battles that are not enjoyable for one player are usually not enjoyable for both players.
We have now experimented with fortifications and super heavies being declared as well as 50% of the defending army. This is too much. We have decided the following amendment:
ReplyDeletedefending army still chooses mission and battlefield deployment (including terrain - max 3, min 1 to each of the 6 sections) and who deploys and goes first (steal initiative is possible).
LOW and fortifications from both armies to be declared beforehand and the attacking army can ask the composition of up to 3 units. Eg 'tell me a heavy support unit'; 'I have three war walkers each with 2 brightlances'. If the answer was 'I have no heavy support' this is still useful information and still counts as one of the questions.