Kill Points or VP Points

[Marquo]

I trying to get back into this great series, playing, "Not One Step Back_Alt" as the Soviet and find a nagging frustration resurfacing. My opponent asked me why I was retreating, and not staying put (Not one step back).

As for moving back, the one thing that has always annoyed me about TOC games is that players seem to lose too many point for losing men, and are not rewarded enough for holding or taking objectives. I have won most of my games by pocketing and destroying units merely for the points; why even go after the objectives if one can win by destroying units? What incentive do I have for staying put and acting like a Soviet, when I will gain nothing but defeat by this behavior?

Yes, some will opine that there should be several ways to win a game, and I agree. I beleive the way to solve this conundrum is have the VPs for capturing objectives vary over time, so that if a player wants to try to win by simply annhilating his opponent and ignoring objectives, then he better do it because the geographical VPs will be decreasing over time, and switching to capturing them later will be much less lucrative. Conversely, if I want to dash to the Meuse and capture Namur but not destroy every battalion in my way, then give me megapoints for capturing it very early, and do not take them all back if the Americans recapture it.

Imagine: the Axis captures Namur on turn 40 and is awarded 5,000 VPs. The Americans retake it on turn 50 but it then worth only 3,000 points. So the Americans regain 3,000 and the Axis player nets 2,000 points for having even captured it, even if lost later. The static, "All or None" aspect is boring. Why should I even risk such as drive to the Meuse when I can easily win by simply decimating every Allied unit and advance only half way across the map and digging in?

As it stands, the TOC games are too cut and dry/black and white in terms of VPs. I really enjoy playing GMT's East Front Series board game because it awards dynamic VPs, and this forces players to engage in riskier behavior and take more measured chances to win.

TOC is one of my all time favorites, and it could vastly improve with more dynamic and fluid VPs to force more exciting play.

Marquo :soap: