Good afternoon
Apologies if this has been asked before but I could not find anything on the forum
MeG looks very interesting but before I buy (yet) another set of ancient rules is it possible to have a little more info re how suitable it is for multiplayer (assuming that becomes a thing again).
The group I play with only play multiplayer, typically 2-4 players a side (and as an aside we only play historical scenarios, not point games).
- Is MeG ok for multiple commanders on each side?
- Can all players (on the same side) take an impulse at the same time or does 1 player have to move, wait for a reaction move, then the next etc? That would be a bit of a killer for us as each player could be waiting for 7 others to do something before they get to have a go.
- Would each player need their own counters/cards (so we'd need 8 sets) or does each side share a single pool?

As a sneaky side question - with regard to command control I understand that better units get to do 'more things' with 'worse' colours but for example when you have something like Alexander vs Darius do they each have the identical pools of counters (or card deck) or does Alex' have more 'good' ones in his pool/deck than poor old Darius?
And if they do have the same pool would it 'break' the game if you wanted to accentuate differences in command control ability further and give better generals a better pool/deck?

Thanks for you time

Ben

Hi Ben,

I've never done a multiplayer MeG game so will leave that bit for those who have.

On the command question in a normal game both sides share the same card deck/command discs so a are drawing from the same pool. Differential in command and control is exercised through the number of cards/discs each general is allowed each turn. So when setting up a scenario you would give the armies generals that would give them the overall command and control you think they should have relative to each other - this would be a combination of the number and quality of the generals for each army.

Hi Ben,

I love historical scenarios with multiple players on each side.  It can be done but needs a bit of planning.  The best approach depends on how large the forces are.

It tends to work best where players are "paired off" against each other. You then get fewer opportunities for interactions between players outside their own pair.  Each pair can play at their own pace and then catch up at the end of the turn.   If you have 8 players with each player controlling more than one general then I would probably extend the deck to 2 packs and have 2 pairs of players sharing each deck.

I would suggest you need to play the game a few times to understand all the mechanisms before going for a big multi-player game.  Break a battle down into a series of smaller conflicts each 1 player vs 1 player.  There are plenty of suitable candidates depending upon which period of history interests you most. 

Richard

A couple of comments on this:

- Can all players (on the same side) take an impulse at the same time or does 1 player have to move, wait for a reaction move, then the next etc? That would be a bit of a killer for us as each player could be waiting for 7 others to do something before they get to have a go.

a) That is true, but is not necessarily so bad IMO when contrasted with many other rules which are more strict my turn - your turn; there you would have the 4 players on each side all moving concurrently (possibly getting into a tangle as their units get in each others way - arguably a good thing!) and happy to be involved, but then all having to wait an even longer time when it is the other side's turn. Some rules may be better suited to achieve concurrency for all players all of the time, but I am not familiar with any.

b) More likely to be a problem I think is the question of what order the moves are made in - this can be critical to the what actually happens in the turn (e.g. does unit A get charged in the flank by unit B? or does A charge C first and get out of range of B?). Having the C-in-C decide on the order of all moves, and leaving the sub-commanders to implement each in turn could work, but might not be the gaming experience that players are looking for.

I was actually taught MeG using a form of multiplayer; I was given control of the General/command on the right flank and told to have at it. (After a brief rules explanation, of course)

That play mode works pretty well at two players to a side, with the team members taking their moves in the order that the situation dictates (player A jumping in when the timing is right, player B asking player A to stall for him, etc.).
I found that MeG plays pretty well that way at 2-per-side, but would probably bog down at 3 (or 4!) to a side.


The idea of having one player per team acting as an overall commander for 3 other players might have some promise (they don't command troops, they just come up with the overall game plan, pass cards, and herd cats), but you'll want to get some more normal games in first to get the feel of how the game is supposed to play, and whether that experience will work for your group.

Hi Ben

QuoteGood afternoon
Apologies if this has been asked before but I could not find anything on the forum
MeG looks very interesting but before I buy (yet) another set of ancient rules is it possible to have a little more info re how suitable it is for multiplayer (assuming that becomes a thing again).

Simple answer is yes it works really well.  In fact our main games down here are one a month big 6 player a side games in 28mm.

QuoteThe group I play with only play multiplayer, typically 2-4 players a side (and as an aside we only play historical scenarios, not point games).
- Is MeG ok for multiple commanders on each side?

Yes we play 6 a side a lot.

Quote- Can all players (on the same side) take an impulse at the same time or does 1 player have to move, wait for a reaction move, then the next etc? That would be a bit of a killer for us as each player could be waiting for 7 others to do something before they get to have a go.

So all you do is alternate sides and each player makes and action or passes.  Once and individual passes twice they are out of the turn.  Once all have passed the turn is over.  So yes you get all 4-6 on a side moving simultaneously.

Quote- Would each player need their own counters/cards (so we'd need 8 sets) or does each side share a single pool?

No you share a single set.  I would suggest using cards for big games as players hold them in their hands as one general only. Above 16 players you would need a second set.

QuoteAs a sneaky side question - with regard to command control I understand that better units get to do 'more things' with 'worse' colours but for example when you have something like Alexander vs Darius do they each have the identical pools of counters (or card deck) or does Alex' have more 'good' ones in his pool/deck than poor old Darius?

There are the command and control dynamics:
1) better generals get more cards.discs.  A legendary Alexander would get 5 to a competent Darius 3.
2) drilled troops have more option for a said colour say GREEN than formed than tribal.  So three troop types. It is especially potent in the early double moves where drilled troops can do all a sorts of moves and turns as part of a double move whereas tribals can only go directly ahead with a double
3) professional command structure can have their Army Commander hand of discs to sub-generals

All three are very simple but when combined give a real C&C variety at both troops, general and command structure levels.

QuoteAnd if they do have the same pool would it 'break' the game if you wanted to accentuate differences in command control ability further and give better generals a better pool/deck?

.

You won't need to due to the above.  But do experiment once you have got the system well understood.  we have needed very few special rules so far.

QuoteThanks for you time

Ben

Most welcome and I hope welcome aboard.
[/quote]

Many thanks for the answers, sounds encouraging.
I will watch a couple more of the videos and make a decision

Ben

If you go to the FB main page and scroll you will see a few big games in action.

Si

Here's a link to the last one pre covid.
Siege of Malta.

https://mortem-et-gloriam.co.uk/smf/index.php?topic=859.0

S

We play multi-player more than one-on-one actually. We pretty much do it straight. The CinC play decides which player will take an action and spend a card. Still only one action per turn per side. If we are ever able to meet in person again, maybe we can try the multiple actions per side.

The key we find is the pace of the game and the interactivity.  It allows multiplayer to feel very enjoyable as you are always involved.

Si