Jump to content
Grim110

3 Player games. How do you do it?

Recommended Posts

As the title says, how does everyone else handle a 3 player game?

- how do you handle deployment?

- how do you handle Tac cards being cancelled? (My first 3 player game almost every card from each player was cancelled by one of the others)

- how do you handle objective cards? Sink 70% of the Enemy for instance, 70% of each? 70% of the total combined enemy? Also Is your objective achieved if you have to eliminate all mediums and each enemy sinks each other's mediums?

Just want a few ideas to smooth things out!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my gaming group has these thoughts on 3 player games:

Deployment should be in the center of one long table edge and near the corners of the other. It should look like an equilateral triangle. This means two players will be deployed about a foot "within" the table. This means we do not use advance or flanking forces.

TAC cards should not be used.

Play a scenario! A standard blood bath can be fun, and hiding your objective from the others can be fun, when your opponent sinks the other opponents dreadnaught and you have "kill the commodore" count yourself lucky. War will be kind to the shrewd commander.

When we do take cards the objective always includes both enemy forces.

Otherwise 3 player games are best played with a whacky objective such as controlling sectors or obtaining resource objectives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As the title says, how does everyone else handle a 3 player game?

- how do you handle deployment?

- how do you handle Tac cards being cancelled? (My first 3 player game almost every card from each player was cancelled by one of the others)

- how do you handle objective cards? Sink 70% of the Enemy for instance, 70% of each? 70% of the total combined enemy? Also Is your objective achieved if you have to eliminate all mediums and each enemy sinks each other's mediums?

Just want a few ideas to smooth things out!

 

 

Do you mean 3 player games or 3 side games?

 

If three player, A+B against C is easy and simple, but you probably mean three side games, so....

 

Scenarios cover deployment and victory conditions very well.

 

TACs- if points are relevant for your scenario, do TACs played or used to cancel deduct from the relevant player score, to keep matters simple.

 

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Use a pre-constructed scenario. Trying to produce a 3-player free for all is wasted effort. At least with a scenario you can avoid all notions of "balance" and simply define goals for each side to achieve. Also, you can ignore the gamey aspects of DW like force composition and points values. It's a really good way to get use out of models that never see the table and weirdo units like merchants, etc.

Blockade running, passing through a strait, escorting a convoy, seizing a bridge, holding out for X number of turns... The list goes on. It just takes a little time investment ahead of time, and players who aren't married to playing the same bog-standard "line up and shoot" that they've already done 600 times in FOW, 40K, Warmachine, etc...

Dissimilar and unbalanced forces make interesting things happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the past we've played with 3 players as a 2 side game; one player creates 2 commands, each with a separate commodore, and each complying independently with the force construction rules. That player then plays their two forces against the other two players, alternating activations between their two commands (with each of the other players activating on the subsequent activation). It works reasonably well so long as one player has enough points of models, and is prepared not to have any 'down-time'.  There is a single hand of TAC cards for each side, and one fleet order per side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

when I play more the a single opponent my gaming group and I have a couple house rules that we use firstly we don't really use tac's when we multiplay we just say its a death match last one alive wins as for deployment we usually have 1 on each side of the board or in each of the corners it deviates from the rules a bit but we are all fine with the house rule we play for special situations. any other 1v1 games we adhere to the regular rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies guys.

We played one 3 player game a few days before I posted. We made certain each player was equidistant from each other, I believe it was 32" apart from each main deployment area, player A took a short edge and players B + C took about half of each long edge.

For cards we were using them as we would in a normal game but as I said almost every card was cancelled by one of the other 2 players, a few got through but overall we may as well not have used them.

For missions player B and C both drew mediums and sunk each other's mediums along with player A's mediums, while player A drew the commodore card and almost got both (players B+C's commodore vessels on 1 and 3 hp's) so we had two players complete their objective at the same time.

As for gameplay it was actually rather fast, a ship could sail up and broadside both enemies quite easily, we kinda met in the middle with our large/massives and pummelled each other, anything smaller than that that went anywhere near the middle got sunk very fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So my gaming group has odd number players more often then not. Some times 1v2 or even 2v3. This exact scenario is defined in the rules book near the set up section and we do each side deploys number of squads equal to max players on one side. But models cannot target the same enemy model for any reason on the same activation. Other then that we use all the other rules with flanking and advance. minus TAC since we don't use TAC at all anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Down here, when we are 3 around the table we never play anymore 3 side games... exactly for the same reasons.

So I would advice that 2 player sharing the MFV (if possible with 2 core forces) against the last one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being the one that always gets ganged up on during 1v1v1 (mainly because I have the most experience and it's my miniatures they're using) I've given up on 3 sided games.  3 players now goes to 2v1 where I feel I have a chance even if I'm always the 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This sparks another question. If the game is 2v1, traditionally (for some odd reason) its 2 nations against a singular nation. Could you see a home brew rule that expands the number of commodores to the maximum on one side? I've personally have noticed the "go for the leader" objective to be a bit one sided when the 1 only as one flag ship but the other side has 1 for each nation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our group finds that 3 way games can work but are far better with scenarios.  Outside of scenarios there is generally one player that hangs back and mops up after the other two forces have pummelled each other.

 

 

 

Another problem we found with 3-way games was where one player would cripple a ship and another player would then step in and finish it off, gaining all the VPs despite doing very little.  This led to very defensive gameplay and longer games.   To counter this we now often play VPs per point of damage inflicted (so total cost of the damaged model divided by the number of HP it started with is the VPs gained per point of damage inflicted.  It sounds fiddly but a pre-prepared spreadsheet means it actually works quite quickly, you just need to have somebody keeping score).  We found this makes players more gung-ho and the games more fun.

 

 

 

One scenario we play is where we have 2 players with smaller forces against one player with a larger force.  However, only the small forces can gain VPs with the third player not playing to win (they’re there for the fun of it).  The smaller forces can’t attack each other so whichever of them gets most VPs from the larger player wins.  As they aren’t playing competitively the third player often uses models that otherwise wouldn’t see the light of day.  Set up is opposite board edges with the 2 players mixing in with each other (it’s agreed not to intentionally collide or position models to cause collisions) and we sometimes have the larger force set up first.  We generally limit commodores to just the damage repair re-roll ability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've tried that too. 1 person ends up getting ganged up on and not having too much fun. At least for us.

'

Ive come to accept that I will usually be the target of the 2v1 in a 3 player free for all. Ive taken this to heart. Means they are both afraid of me enough to hurt me before each other. But that also means I get to decide the overall winner at the end of the game. If they are both focusing on me. I determine who wins by who I damage and hurt the most before it comes down to just the other 2 playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.