Sign in to follow this  
TheBeeze

Phase 3 Reset Poll

GBW Phase 3 Reset  

7 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Should GBW do a reset to get the game moving a little faster?

    • Yes
      5
    • No
      2

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 12/31/21 at 09:03 PM

Recommended Posts

We will of course discuss this details of what a reset would mean:

Will players start over from scratch on their money? No
Will perks and other things still be good? Yes
What about territory? Depending on what we decide with the map will lead to the outcome here, but territory holdings will not be disregarded. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted no because: I think a drastic change in the gameplay is necessary, not to make it faster, perhaps by changing the map from 150 ca. quadrants to 75 (maybe?), to allow over time to meet first and fight against each other. Also, how should we divide the controlled territories between those who played and conquered them? It is an unfair situation where in the end for someone like me who has occupied many territories and finds himself with such a large budget, he would find himself too above those who have just started playing. If you really had to decide for a reset, let it be reset in every aspect of the game, obviously keeping the map which is well done. If the gameplay does not have to be changed I see it hard for us all to see a greater influx of players over time from one side and the other, already so we practically play 5-6 out of how many subscribers? I would not want it to become a kind of game in which only the hard core of the forum interested in this topic participates ... The beauty is in diversity, participation, comparison. I have seen this game change over time since 2016 if not before (first as a spectator and then as an active player), its golden age, but now I have the feeling that something is missing to us all. I know, people come and go, people change, interests change, and that's why we have to go out to meet the masses and their tastes if we want something to change positively. So for me the answer remains: we must be braver, we must face the future head on, a simple reset of a few game dynamics is not enough. This of course is just my humble thought. Whatever decision will be made I will be happy all the same, because I like to play with you, I like to reinvent myself new constructions and models and mocs, I always like to test myself.:pir-thumb:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ParmBrick said:

Everything you said.

The point here is to make fixes ranging from the map to how the game is played. It is all encompassing. And like I said in the original post, existing players won't start from scratch but it doesn't mean things will be as exorbitant as they are now either. If we continue on like we are now, the first actual battle might happen by the spring (and it's only a maybe). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheBeeze said:

The point here is to make fixes ranging from the map to how the game is played. It is all encompassing. And like I said in the original post, existing players won't start from scratch but it doesn't mean things will be as exorbitant as they are now either. If we continue on like we are now, the first actual battle might happen by the spring (and it's only a maybe)

I know, but will changing the organization of the map solve the problem in its entirety, along with other small changes to the game? I don't know, but the way I have lived the game in recent years, obviously my opinion, not entirely, perhaps at first, then continuously fight with each other, using moc against moc to conquer and defend, and endlessly (maybe?) repeating this gameplay, it will tire playing as it is now, and players will walk away again.

We are paying for the "repetition" factor that none of us had originally calculated, and we should now reevaluate it for future circumstances. Today is conquest and conquest, tomorrow it will be defend and attack (if it goes well), defend and defend (if it goes wrong). Without the slightest advancement of the storyline, because once the fronts have touched, everyone, in my opinion, will go to attack and defend themselves from the other faction, forgetting about the BoS, Soalon, side mission, contracts, etc.

Edited by ParmBrick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in the midle of yes and no

yes the game must restart but i think its not "fair" to the effort we all gave so far

so a "fast" solution might would be to be able to hit 2 squares per round with one moc - movement like a rock (chess) 

so the game will be more fast and will end soon in order to start the new one :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As the new guy, I've observed a bit and slowly figured out how the game is conducted. Did I come in at a good time, yes and no. Yes, because of the need for fresh meat in the grinder and maybe a different viewpoint. No, because of the questionable state of the game. That said, I have a few notes from reading all the recent comments.

I can see how the current setup can lead to people getting bored with the pace and the repetition as @ParmBrick mentioned. I believe something probably needs to be done to raise the interest level and bring in new blood. This setup does seem to have a problem where it becomes a grinding slugfest akin to the Western Front in the Great War. Mobility is key. @SATSOK has a good point, make it fluid. In modern combat, the "left hook" out in the desert quickly enveloped an entire army. Airborne operations move troops and supplies rapidly. Logistics and momentum are big. Allow this in both the exploration phase and the combat. Drive an armoured strike force deep into enemy territory a-la Rommel and gobble up map squares. Build a MOC to show your speed and tenacity, but hope the next turn somebody doesn't outfox you and stop your diesel resupply. Let the airborne forces descend in a mass drop, taking a vital square and holding it long enough to choke supplies. Bring forth the amphibious assault, landing on the beaches behind the lines and cutting into supply routes. Watch a flock of helicopters deliver a battalion of troops in minutes.

Are all of these big actions? Yes! Do they have to be in a MOC? No. A single tank to focus on with maybe the dust covered silhouette of a second could be enough to give the impression of a full sized armoured brigade on the move. A view from the top of the landing craft looking forward onto the beach with marines from multiple LCCs can evoke a full wave. Dozens of tiny aircraft up high with a few parachutists about to land can do the same.

Give us the flexibility to be creative. I do aircraft. For me, Close Air Support, airborne ops, and resupply options would be great. Let me drop a few of the old Toy Story green minifigs down on an unsuspecting and unoccupied square near the opposition. I can roll in hot with unguided rockets, cluster bombs, and napalm to  I'm sure some naval genius would love to land his Imperial Marines close to us and be the same pain in the behind. Not everybody has lots of special forces teams. For all the capabilities of Hogan's Hero's, they still wound up in the Stalag camp. Somebody, somewhere, was competent enough to catch them.

I voted, but the options are limited. Maybe a limited reset, but revised rules to enable new options for faster gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.