Mongol Feedback

[Bill Hupp]

Not to resurrect this thread unnecessarily, but the origin of it was in the following comment after a game.

Mongols aren't done historically just like the legacy game, ho hum.

As DS has pointed out, messing with the CP part of the game, makes it less a fair game. As DK notes, the CP rule can punish those who use more than 3 active groups. As coopman suggested you could have a Crap Your Pants morale role (Battle Card) for the Mongol opponent at the start of the game to see how many stands you need to subtract during the set up. (This could be a ‘Terror’ Campaign Level Battle Card and could also be applicable to Assyrians, etc.)

Now this gentleman, very well read and someone who had spent a number of years professionally at the War College, had only played the 48 point competition game. So he might just be rejecting the ‘level of historical flavor’ he likes in a game. But I think he was just rejecting the 48 point competition game. I was the same way in regard to the legacy system for many years and the majority of gamers in our group don’t like tournament style games (FoW, BA, etc.). The success of Rod’s 28mm historical games shows how the game can bridge to that group of gamers.

I actually like the historical flavor of the basic 48 point game and the CP process is so simple it really works in making the game fast play. When doing historical scenarios and campaigns, I think you can layer on whatever level of historical flavor without breaking the basic fairness of the system.