I have been thinking about a community made skirmish scenario set for skirmish games: to give a range of fun and balanced scenarios. Most warcaster scenarios are distinguished by the rules on objectives: so why not just randomise their effects and positions?
Below is a very rough draft of how the rule set could work. It collects a set of interesting layouts, objectives, and additional missions (basically random secondary objectives), and rules to randomise each on sequence.
Goal is for each game to feel unique, with alternate rules to keep people on their toes. As a side bonus, I’d like to have enough scenarios alternating between warriors only scoring and warjack / vehicle scoring to tip the balance a bit more towards warriors.
I would love any feedback on the concept, and anyone who has ideas. I want this to be a true community effort, and only finish if people see value in it.
Questions to guide feedback
Do you think the game needs new skirmish scenarios for competition play?
Does a fan made randomised approach like this make sense?
Do you think the example approach will encourage enough diversity in strategy and lists?
4)Are the mission cards necessary? Do they add flair and extra strategy, or are they overwhelming?
Noting the cards are examples so far, and need more development, but any feedback or ideas for them? Do they seem ‘balanced’ and interesting?
1: I could see this in competitive Skirmish, I wonder if the different maps will dramatically change the balance of the.
It makes sense but I think it might need to be expanded for more variety.
It’s hard to say, there is definitely a meta among factions so I don’t know how much this will change that.
I think you would need to do some test games, but the simplistic approach leads me to believe that this would work just fine. The VP does give me an idea about changing scoring rules…maybe I should make a post about that.