Twilight Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Download the Twilight Strategy e-book!

Pages: 1 [2]  All

Author Topic: Card I'd like to see changed  (Read 13900 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

budzo

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 83
  • Respect: +10
    • View Profile
Re: Card I'd like to see changed
« Reply #25 on: May 26, 2014, 04:36:49 pm »
0

Cards Id see changed:

NATO - even wo prerequsits its too poor as for 4 ops. I would make it 2 ops wo pre or add sth to it.

Like no De Gualle/ Willy Brandt cancel, Special Relationship - no need for uk control.

Summit - i see no reason to play as an event, unless in desperation (even then u probably have lost the game)

Latin Am Death Squads - Id add some bonus to it dont know how. Maybe realign bonus.

Improved terrorism - just to powerful combined with lone gunman in us hand. Add Aldrich Ames (dont have to be in the same turn just force usa to get rid of china) to it and USSR spacing Kennedy and u have impossible situation for USA.

BT/Quagmire -  -1 to the roll for every unsuccesful attempt and its ok.
Logged

AAhern

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
  • Wargameroom username: Ahern
  • Respect: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Card I'd like to see changed
« Reply #26 on: June 27, 2014, 11:44:26 pm »
0

The way I would change RS/P is as follows:

If played for the event by the USSR, the card becomes a US-Only event when put back into the deck.  If played for event by US, it becomes a USSR-only when put back into the deck.  Following triggering the event a second time, it is removed from the game.

This would prevent someone from being hit by more than one RS / RP in the course of a game, and also might lead someone to play it for OPS early on as opposed to having it return to the deck as the opponent's card. 

It would still be an important and powerful card, but hopefully less of a gamechanger if one person happened to be lucky and draw it 2 or 3 times.
Logged

Billw147

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 23
  • Wargameroom username: Billw147
  • Respect: +5
    • View Profile
Re: Card I'd like to see changed
« Reply #27 on: June 28, 2014, 05:18:11 am »
0

Played an exciting and close game last night, lasting almost 2 hours, until turn 9/10 my opponent got Bear Trapped for 8 turns (combination of 3 dice roll fails then one op/scoring cards remaining, then into next turn). Spoilt an exciting end to what would have been a great game. Didn't really feel like a win.

/very sad
Logged

tod

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6
  • Respect: +1
    • View Profile
Re: Card I'd like to see changed
« Reply #28 on: November 10, 2015, 02:16:08 am »
0

Red Scare/Purge could be two separate cards, one for each side, and discarded after use.
Logged

wiggin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4
  • Respect: +1
    • View Profile
Re: Card I'd like to see changed
« Reply #29 on: November 10, 2015, 10:38:03 am »
0

I would like IP war changed to:

Get 2 mil OPs. Certain victory with no neighbours, 2+ with 1 neigbours, 4+ with 2 neighours, 6 with 3 neighbours.

Result of victory:
2 VP and remove all of opponents influence.


As it is now it is too swingy for my taste. As one of very few cards.
Logged

pietshaq

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 262
  • Wargameroom username: WojciechPietrzak_TS
  • Respect: +46
    • View Profile
    • My Twilight Struggle blog
Re: Card I'd like to see changed
« Reply #30 on: November 10, 2015, 10:42:09 am »
0

This version would actually be more swingy.
Logged
If you find my contribution useful, please donate some Bitcoins: 1LTicKy5ww4tAQwLqRDHxbpKHBQ9QvcK72
My Twilight Struggle blog

wiggin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4
  • Respect: +1
    • View Profile
Re: Card I'd like to see changed
« Reply #31 on: November 10, 2015, 12:28:37 pm »
0

To me, the main problem with the card is that often a 5-6 gives an important battleground to the other side, for a potential 22 point swing over the whole game.

With this change it will still be annoying, but the opponent can refill it, and not lose asia dom.
Logged

KiG

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 40
  • Respect: +5
    • View Profile
Re: Card I'd like to see changed
« Reply #32 on: November 10, 2015, 10:29:14 pm »
0

The swinginess is a deliberate design choice, for this and many other cards. It stops people turtling and ensures that there's always a chance of victory....or defeat!
Logged

lambolt

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 54
  • Respect: +1
    • View Profile
Re: Card I'd like to see changed
« Reply #33 on: May 10, 2016, 10:25:31 am »
0

R/S/P is not really a 5-6 OP difference when you consider you're throwing away 4 OPS as the headline though, I agree that NATO is a lot more obviously rubbish card, or at least, it feels like its not much use as a US event
Logged

Chimista

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
  • Wargameroom username: chimista
  • Respect: +18
    • View Profile
Re: Card I'd like to see changed
« Reply #34 on: May 13, 2016, 07:03:30 am »
0

NATO is an OK card as it is. Not all cards can be game changing, otherwise they would make the game too swingy. NATO is a free ops card for the USSR... unless someone had played Marshall Plan or Warsaw previously. It's a reason why the US player wants to have those events played asap. Once activated NATO is really cool. It protects Italy from a Brush War and also makes Special Relationship a powerful card, quite unplayable for the USSR. Of course being a 4 ops card it's pretty expensive for the USA to play it as an Event... but so it is for the USSR to space it. I have even played it as an event as the USA in order to protect Italy for good.
Logged

pietshaq

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 262
  • Wargameroom username: WojciechPietrzak_TS
  • Respect: +46
    • View Profile
    • My Twilight Struggle blog
Re: Card I'd like to see changed
« Reply #35 on: May 15, 2016, 03:28:45 am »
0

I twice played NATO as USA for the event when it won me the game.
Once the reason was to protect Italy when it was what USSR needed to Control Europe and Controlling Europe was USSR's only chance.
And once just to boost Special Relationships because I needed 2VPs ASAP to win by Wargames in a game that would be lost otherwise.
Logged
If you find my contribution useful, please donate some Bitcoins: 1LTicKy5ww4tAQwLqRDHxbpKHBQ9QvcK72
My Twilight Struggle blog

QC1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
  • Respect: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Card I'd like to see changed
« Reply #36 on: May 27, 2016, 01:41:46 pm »
0

RS/P:
May add "If played as an event in Early War add this Card to the Midwar Deck instead of discarding it"
Would prevent double RS/P in Early War, but not multiple times throughout the whole game

And if you like a slightly riskier game:
"Add CIA Created and Lone Gunman to Deck and shuffle it, even if the Cards were removed from the game."

Somehow I like the Idea of introducing a risk, when playing RS/P
Logged

kaladost

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4
  • Respect: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Card I'd like to see changed
« Reply #37 on: September 24, 2017, 05:36:22 pm »
0

I'm usualy not really offended when my opponent red/scare me on first turn headline or AR1. I look at it this way.

Most of the time I'm not gonna play 6 cards for OP, it's usualy a mix of OPs, Card effects, coups and propably scoring card. And of course I may have some 1 OP that are not affected by RSRP. So all in all, I may lose let say between 0-6 OP, probably more in the range of 2-4 OP on that turn. And my opponent lost 4 OP.

So most of the time, you end up between a net -1 to +1 OP. I don't know if I see this wrong but hey haha It's a way to see it I think.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  All
 

Page created in 0.138 seconds with 21 queries.