"Three's A Crowd" Topic
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Return to the Three's A Crowd Poll
|warwell||12 Oct 2017 2:31 a.m. PST|
I don't play 3-sided wargames but from my experience with LARPing, 3 sided scenarios tend to turn into 2 vs. 1 scenarios, which stink.
|PzGeneral||12 Oct 2017 3:52 a.m. PST|
I agree with Warwell. I had a similar experience at a convention tournament. 3 people signed up for the event, the GM said, OK, you all play a free-for-all. Player 1 looked at Player 2 and said, "Let's attack him" (me). They ganged up, destroyed me. Then reset and played each other…..
| Florida Tory ||12 Oct 2017 3:54 a.m. PST|
I normally prefer, and play, 2-sided games, but the occasional multi-sided fracas like Pig Wars can be a lot of fun.
|advocate||12 Oct 2017 5:38 a.m. PST|
| x42brown ||12 Oct 2017 7:12 a.m. PST|
I have a liking for nominally two sides but with players on the same side having differing victory conditions.
|Rallynow ||12 Oct 2017 8:24 a.m. PST|
I like multiple side games. But I don't necessarily prefer one over the other. I like multi-player/side board games like Britannia, Third Reich and Civilization.
There is a difference between multi-player and multi-side. I like more than one player on a side because I like the team concept. Get together and arrive at a common goal, a common plan.
But three players in general as noted above becomes one on two situation but that is not always a bad thing. Sometimes you don't have enough players to do more than three.
I am talking about one side has one player and the other side has two players. The only bad things are you don't have a teammate to discuss strategy with, which could be a benefit or not so much and if it is a large game it could wear you out.
|jefritrout||12 Oct 2017 9:28 a.m. PST|
I don't like 3 sided games, however 4 sided or more have given me the most enjoyment. I remember winning a 17 sided game, which over a matter of hours devolved into 4 equal factions. Then with the defeat of one of them it became 3 and soon after 2 (which resulted in a surrender as it was 12 v 3 with two of the three offering to attack their "allies".
|Frederick ||13 Oct 2017 6:58 a.m. PST|
I am with Jefritrout here – I like a nice four sided or more game; I also think that three sided becomes 2 on 1 pretty quick
|kodiakblair||13 Oct 2017 2:44 p.m. PST|
Doesn't bother me,solo player so I always win :-)