Author Topic: Alternative to objective-oriented games?  (Read 2345 times)

redcoat

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 40
    • View Profile
Alternative to objective-oriented games?
« on: May 06, 2013, 02:14:12 PM »
Hi all,

In most C18th battles the attackers' aim was surely to hurt the defending army so badly that it withdrew from the campaign, allowing the attackers a free run at alternative strategic objectives (such as the capture of a key fortress). It was surely pretty rare for armies to seriously contest a particular terrain feature as a battle-turning objective in itself.

As a variant to the objective-oriented game, what incentive could one offer the attacker (beyond the customary extra unit or two and extra cards) to go onto the offensive? Break the enemy army or lose the battle? Or is this too harsh?

And what effect might releasing the defender from protecting an objective have on that defender's deployment? Might there be unexpected and unwelcome 'gamey' implications? ???

Cheers all,
Redcoat
« Last Edit: May 06, 2013, 02:18:45 PM by redcoat »
Cheers,
Redcoat

Old Grognard

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
    • View Profile
Re: Alternative to objective-oriented games?
« Reply #1 on: May 07, 2013, 12:54:33 AM »
As a variant to the objective-oriented game, what incentive could one offer the attacker (beyond the customary extra unit or two and extra cards) to go onto the offensive? Break the enemy army or lose the battle? Or is this too harsh?

And what effect might releasing the defender from protecting an objective have on that defender's deployment? Might there be unexpected and unwelcome 'gamey' implications? ???

I think you've nailed it in your first paragraph - the objective is needed to make the attacker attack.  Other than game inclination to "get to grips" there is no other real incentive to attack.

Equally holding the objective is only a minor victory so it is not the be all and end all for the defender.

Thus for both there is a reason to try for the major victory via combat but there is also a reason to claim the objective to prevent a tie.


Le Grand Fromage

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5373
  • "Il faut cultiver son jardin."
    • View Profile
    • HONOUR
Re: Alternative to objective-oriented games?
« Reply #2 on: May 07, 2013, 06:08:01 AM »
For 18th century games I thought it was pretty important to have something that hinted at a "line of communications" or some reason that the defender had made his stand in that spot.   Commanders of that time were very careful not to let an enemy move astride their LoC.   An objective marker is just a very simplified way of representing that.

Peter Clarke

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 211
    • View Profile
Re: Alternative to objective-oriented games?
« Reply #3 on: May 07, 2013, 06:49:00 AM »
That was my assumption, Sam.  Without having formal LoC rules, the objective system works well to my mind.

As attacker, I have the choice of going for the objective or destroying the enemy army; and the defender has the same option.  The defender also has to choose whether to commit a unit to garrison duties or not.  In campaign terms, I'd much rather win a decisive victory than a marginal one: it will often make the difference between concluding the war or not.

I'd be concerned if there were no objective (determined by the attacker) that the defender could just use their terrain choices to make a defensive position in a corner as a default deployment.

Peter

redcoat

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 40
    • View Profile
Re: Alternative to objective-oriented games?
« Reply #4 on: May 07, 2013, 11:50:42 AM »
That all makes perfect sense now - thanks all, gents.
Matt
Cheers,
Redcoat

David_W

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Alternative to objective-oriented games?
« Reply #5 on: June 17, 2013, 12:47:49 AM »
Coming into the conversation very late I know, but...

I don't mind the objective marker as it shapes the selection of terrain ad the defender's deployment, but I don't recall a single game of Maurice where the objective marker has even been threaten.  All my games end with an army breaking.

But it does shape the game so do't min it.

David W