The 2.0 games I have played, go like this. Move into position. Dance around quite a bit. Try to stay alive so you can run to the objectives on the last turn. -OR- In place of the long dance phase, there is a melee fest where the objectives are totally ignored until the last turn or so.

I have this idea, and I would like to run it by WK when I go to Dragon Con Friday.

Victory Conditions - The game ends if:
1. one player's army is entirely destroyed. The other player is the winner.
2. one player controls all 3 objectives at the end of his turn. That player is the winner.
3. the 50 minute time has expired. The player with the most objectives is the winner. If that is equal go by point value of destroyed figures.

Wait!!! That won't work because 3 fells could jump on the objectives and game over!

I knew you would say that. Here is the fix.

Change to game set up to.
1. Place center objective.
2. Place terrain.
3. Each player places the close objective just prior to taking his first action.

Now, think of the fight that would ensue. Think about the moves you would make to take the 3rd objective. Lure them toward your objective then hit them behind enemy lines.

Also, here is something else to spice up the game.

When ever you hold an objective at the beginning of your turn you get a free command roll.

What do you think?

Hmmm...I kind of like both the possibility of winning by controlling all of them, and I really like the idea that you get some sort of benefit out of controlling - giving you a lot more incentive to get the objectives. Not sure if just a command roll is very good...generally I design armies to rely as little on command as possible, but it would help swarms more, which is a really good thing.
Interesting ideas!

the 2.0 games I've played have gone like this; i quickly get 2 objective tokens (double time or whatever as long as i get 2 back to my area push whatever) I then use a healer heal the objevtice holders up (shades, fells, stalking skeles) and maybe stick them in base with a defender (EGM works well heal then defend but bound....) so I have all my guys very close to where I started and I have one ranged peice (striker, AD works good even with bound, storm golem, a drac) whatever to keep them at bay. But they have to come to me or else they will lose because I have the most objevtive tokens. Thats at least what I do.

amazon12345-

Are you moving the objective tokens during play?

;)

Maybe if you can hold them for 2 or 3 turns, i dont think that 1 tunr and win is a good idea. Still i like the idea of ending the game w/o killing the whole army or time expiring. Reminds me of the Battle of the Black Heart...

*mumbles about how he'd like objectives to be worth points instead*

I like your rules better than others I've heard though.

*mumbles a bunch*

This is a way to make the objectives relevent during the game.

well, I like the idea of controlling 3 of them win... but wut about controlling them for: first the turn yo get then and next turn after it

I don't know why the didn't make the objective tokens the size of a figure base; then you could nicely sit one figure on it and the enemy would HAVE to kill that figure to get to it, providing incentive to get to the objectives first. As is I'm sure there will be lots of messes about whether or not models can fit into little areas between bases to tap the end of the objective :(

For those players who do spend 30 minutes dancing around...what the heck are you doing? Its a fnerking 36" table with move and ranges maxing at at 14! How much maneuvering do you need? Do you want aesthetic arrangements or do you want to CRUSH THE ENEMY!? C'mon, get in there. Unleash your inner orc or whatever and be aggressive!

INTRO:

There should not be One Way to calculate victory. It should vary by scenario. Sheesh, even that card game has at least two ways to win – killing and decking. Board war games with variable forces are made for different ways to win; what WK should do is publish a list of ‘official’ objectives, and let the players mix and match them.

Of course, having a set of (instead of one) “standard” Victory Condition (VC) options would take more than a 6x8 page of 14 point type (with pictures) to explain. That means it won’t happen.

Anyway, here’s what I’d design.

RULES:

1) Victory goes to the player with the most Victory Points (VP) at game’s end. Ties are allowed; if both players have an equal number of VP at game’s end then the game ends in a tie.

2) VP are only awarded at the end of the game.

3) One VP is awarded for each objective achieved.

4) The following are valid Objectives.

a) Exclusive control of an Objective Token.
b) The largest, in points, army on the board.
c) The largest, in figures, army on the board.
d) The most kills, in points.
e) The most kills, in figures.
f) The most, in point value of figures, figures in the opponent’s set up area.
g) The most, in number of figures, figures in the opponent’s set up area.
h) The most figures, in points, exited off the opponent’s side of the board.
i) The most figures, in number, exited off the opponent’s side of the board.
j) Capture and evacuation of a specific enemy figure.

5) When a game is played the Objectives for that game are determined by the players.

In a Standard Game the first Objective is always an Objective Token, placed in the middle of the map. Each player then picks one (or more, if both players agree), Objective from the list. No Objective may be picked more than once, with the exception of ”a) Exclusive control of an Objective Token” and “j) Capture and evacuation of a specific enemy figure.”

In an official tournament the Warlord determines which Objectives will be used for each game. Note that in this case the first objective does not have to be an Objective Token. As well, the Warlord can choose the objectives, choose some of them and let the players choose some, or play it as a Standard Game.

EXAMPLE:

Rick and Jenny are sitting down to a casual 200 point game. Each has built his or her army and before set up pick the objectives for the game. First, an Objective Token is placed in the middle of the board. Next, they agree on the number of objectives – they both want three so the decision is easy. They roll a die to determine who picks the first objective – Jenny rolls high. She picks “g) The most, in number of figures, figures in the opponent’s set up area.” Rick then chooses, and picks “a) Exclusive control of an Objective Token.” Since he picked “a”, he takes an Objective Token and places it on the map according to the Objective Token placement rule. The game then proceeds, with each player rolling to see who goes first.

So, the above game would play out with a total of 3 VP possible, one for each Objective Token, and one to whoever has the highest number of figs in the opponent’s set up area.

COMMENT:

The above is just an outline – the actual rules would describe and define each of the valid Objectives, and nothing says that more couldn’t be added as more imaginative folks than me thought them up, WK tested them, and promoted them to ‘official’. Such a system would allow literally infinite flexibility. Warlords could create official tournaments emphasising things they want. Want to play vanilla? Great, pick “a” three times. Want to play something else? Mix and match to your hearts content. You wouldn’t need a ‘house rule’ to do something interesting, but wouldn’t be forced to be ‘too complex’ either. All ages and brain powers welcome!