Victory Conditions

[Horvo]

In some of the MP scenarios the attacker must seize all of the victory points, but sometimes the defender can win by hiding a unit and slipping it behind the lines to take a VP on the last turn. This seems really gamey to me.

I think it would be better if the game was immediately over once the attacker has seized all the VPs. Also, I think it might be better if each VP was removed once the attacker has seized it. I know there is some logic to forcing the attacker to garrison each VP, but I also think they should get some benefit in resources from seizing a VP, and this could be reflected by assuming that they had sufficient inherent forces to garrison that VP.

Maybe this could be an option for the players to choose in the MP scenarios. What do people think? Thanks

[djddalton]

I don't think there is an issue with this as there are often sufficient units to keep a lookout for this. Experienced players tend to leave spare transport vehicles lying around to spot roaming units so that they can be taken care of. I think it adds a degree of depth to the game, normally you have to throw your extra units into the fray!

Some maps are designed with this in mind, e.g. dday+3 the allies start off with paratroops guarding the west forest to prevent the defending team from sneaking behind enemy lines! Buying time also gives the attacking player an opportunity to sneak troops through the forests but the defending player will certainly take this into account.

However it would be interesting to see an alternative system available, such as gaining points for the amount of VPs you hold per turn on certain missions. However I think for the time being we should all guard our VPs with caution