-
This is directly from the website, thought folks might be interested in reading it on BGG.
We are currently nailing down the card makeup for the new Battlefields of Olympus expansion. Here is a sneak peek at the progress. We have 12 special Campaign cards, 5 new Action cards, 6 Build Action cards, and 2 additional Land Trophy cards. The new Land Trophy cards do not have a fixed victory point value. Instead, the points are calculated during final scoring. The new Warrior deck will be comprised of 5 Heavy Infantry, 10 Archers, 12 Cavalry, 14 Swordsmen and 9 Spearmen. At this stage, everything is subject to change, but it's a good start.
here are more card ideas for the expansion:
Harbor Land Trophy
Value: (?), Color: Red, Yellow, Blue
{During final scoring, add to your score, the total number of Warrior cards in your possession that you have the least number (with 1 Harbor), plus second least number (with 2 Harbors), plus third least number (with 3 Harbors)}
Armory Build Action
Value: Depends on Land it modifies
{Instead of your turn, discard a Warrior card and select any Warrior from the discard pile}
Stable Build Action
Value: Depends on Land it modifies
{Instead of your turn, discard a Warrior card and select a Cavalry from the Warrior discard pile}
Barracks Build Action
Value: Depends on Land it modifies
{FUNCTION TOP SECRET}
Road Build Action
Value: Depends on Land it modifies
{FUNCTION TOP SECRET}
Tower Build Action
Value: Depends on Land it modifies
{FUNCTION TOP SECRET}
Ballista Action
{Discarding a Warrior card from hand, destroy a single face-up Warrior card of your opponent}
Reinforce Action
{Exchange Warrior cards in hand for Warriors in your reserve pile}
Oracle Action
{FUNCTION TOP SECRET}
Conceal Action
{FUNCTION TOP SECRET}
Occupy Action
{FUNCTION TOP SECRET}
Reference art for new Warrior cards:
http://www.siue.edu/COSTUMES/PLATE3BX.HTML
-
Peter
Canada
Port Coquitlam
British Columbia
Makers of Battlefields of Olympus
MoFo Max Payne Yo
-
The current working title is:
Battlefields of Olympus: Conquest & Campaigns
Thoughts? 
-
Paul Drury
United Kingdom
Newcastle upon Tyne
Tyne and Wear
-
Peter,
My friend and I do really enjoy the game at the moment along with the Variant that I have put up on the site here.
As regards an expansion the cards here seem to look interesting enough to pick them up when they go on sale.
Nevertheless from my own point of view, and I can only speak for myself of course, I will say a few things.
The game at the moment to me seems to have a narrative feel to it. In other words as the cards are being played it is possible to create a sort of image of what is going on in my mind. The card artists have done a great job in creating a good looking set of cards and this obviously helps in imagining the sort of actions going on in the game.
I think that the image that I have has a sort of "looking toward the horizon", sort of perspective with the arrival of new cards in my hand as being the new vista that the game provides. In this sense, my feeling is that the expansion of such a would be most welcome if it was to look ahead...
I don't think, for example, that "building" assets or, perhaps, sources of supply would be on the horizon. Probably the mere existence of the troops in hand is seen as the effect of having the assets back home to produce them.
In other words an expansion should create the perspective of the effects of battles and campaigns but not the causes of such battles and campaigns. Accordingly, new tactics, new types of battle environment such as the sea and new enemies would all be appreciated.
If that is of any interest to you then I must thank you for your consideration.
Paul.
-
Peter
Canada
Port Coquitlam
British Columbia
Makers of Battlefields of Olympus
MoFo Max Payne Yo
-
Hi Paul,
Thank you for the feedback. Battlefields of Olympus was meant to have a narrative feel as you suggest. Of course, there is a fine line between gameplay and storytelling. For example, the stacking of Warrior cards during battle was put in place to simplify the mechanics and reduce the play area.
Another way to present the evolution of battle would be to place the next Warrior card to the right of the previously played Warrior cards. The active card is always the one farthest to the right. Any action cards played would sit on top (offset) of the active Warrior card. At the end of battle, players can look back at the battle events.
I understand your concern about the Build Actions. The idea behind them is to add a whole new dimension to the theme and gameplay. I was going to present the new cards as something players could add or remove from the game. For instance, you wouldn't necessarily have to play with the Campaign cards. They are optional components that can be mixed and matched. That being said, all Build Actions are military in nature. The illustrations for them and the rest of the expansion will be consistent with the current imagery.
Thanks again for your comments. They are always welcome! 
Peter
-
Paul Drury
United Kingdom
Newcastle upon Tyne
Tyne and Wear
-
Peter
Good luck with the developments for the expansion. All the best.
Paul 
-
Peter
Canada
Port Coquitlam
British Columbia
Makers of Battlefields of Olympus
MoFo Max Payne Yo
-
Just because our fans are so nice, I thought I would let you have an inside look at Fred's most ambitious work to date. Here is a near final illustration for your viewing pleasure.
Illustrated by Fred Dee
-
-
New art work looks great and the ability to play teams in the new expansion sounds like it could be very good.
Will the the new Campaign cards add new ways of setting up the game i.e. start with so many infantary in your deck but not so many archers etc
Keep up the good work Peter.
-
Peter
Canada
Port Coquitlam
British Columbia
Makers of Battlefields of Olympus
MoFo Max Payne Yo
-
James,
The Campaign cards are another way to score victory points by meeting certain objectives at the end of the game. For example, having the highest ranked Land Trophy in your possession. They also have a secondary use. The Campaign cards can be traded in for 0,1,2 or 3 Warrior cards depending on the Campaign card.
In more detail, at the beginning of the game, players draw 3 Campaign cards and keep one face down in front of them. At the end of a battle, instead of drawing a Warrior card, players may choose to draw a single Campaign card (from the Campaign draw pile) and play it face down in front of them. Players may then choose to discard (face up) any single face down Campaign card they possess in exchange for the number of Warrior cards indicated on the card. At the end of the game, victory points are awarded for successfully meeting objectives, and subtracted otherwise.
Out of the 12 Campaign cards, there is only one Campaign card that exchanges for 0 Warrior cards and two that award 3.
Peter
-
Eric
United States
Maumee
Ohio
-
Hi Peter,
First off, let me say, great game. Tactics, a bit of luck, and SUPERB art make this game great.
Now onto some comments on your new ideas:
- Multiple avenues to achieve success are an excellent idea. Besides just doing battle with each other over specific points, now you add an additional edge in how to play your cards. Nice!
- Terrain and such is interesting, and I see your adding heavy weaponry (Ballistas) which could be interesting
- Oracle eh? Are you using the movie 300 as a sort of reference point for ideas? The artwork kind of reminds me of the epicness of the movie.
- As far as titles go, I think that one sounds pretty standard and formal. How about something that captures the epic feel of the game?
- Battlegrounds of Olympus: Fields of Victory
- Battlegrounds of Olympus: Fields of Glory
- Battlegrounds of Olympus: For Victory
Not the best names but something with a little more zing to them than Conquest and Campaigns.
Thanks for the info and looking forward to seeing what else you guys come up with!
Eric
-
Peter
Canada
Port Coquitlam
British Columbia
Makers of Battlefields of Olympus
MoFo Max Payne Yo
-
I am so happy you are enjoying the game Eric. Spread the word!
The opening battle scenes from Gladiator actually influenced the imagery of the Woodland card. And the Oracle was definitely inspired by 300. These two movies just happen to strike a cord with me. There are other war movies from other periods, but nothing captures my imagination more than the battles of ancient Rome, Greece and Egypt.
As for the title, it is still up in the air. The expansion name probably won't be final until all the components come together. I appreciate your input and I will see what else we can come up with.
On a final note, I'd like to say, the more people that support our efforts, the more time, energy and resources we can spend expanding this game and developing other designs.
More to come, stay tuned. 
Peter
EDIT: Fixed my poor use of words.
-
-
Some ideas for the expansion name... i let you correct if necessary
- Command of Gods
- Conquest For Immortality
- Hail your Fate
-
Peter
Canada
Port Coquitlam
British Columbia
Makers of Battlefields of Olympus
MoFo Max Payne Yo
-
Thank you for the suggestions Grégory. I will keep them in mind.
On another note, I would like to get some feedback from everyone on the 2 versus 2 team play design.
You should be able to play 2 vs 2 teams with the base game. Teammates sit opposite of each other. The only other changes in rules would be the turn order moves in a clockwise direction, the next player is always to your left regardless of who lost the battle, and you can choose anyone to battle, including your partner. Yes, even your partner. Your partner may choose to give you any of his cards before the battle begins (and only before), as long as you do not violate your hand limit. The game winner is the player with the most points on the team with the most overall points. I hope that made sense. So in general, teammates will work together, but only to a point.
NOTE: Only the 2 players directly involved with a battle draw Warrior cards at the end of the battle.
What do you think?
EDIT: Added the note about drawing Warrior cards and then restructured the rule description.
-
Eric
United States
Maumee
Ohio
-
Hi Peter,
The 4 player variant sounds very interesting actually. I love the fact that you're forced to work with your partner, but only to a point. I'm going to try it very soon with my group.
A few more things I've been thinking about:
1) What about some way where you have a choice to fight over different land cards. Maybe they're laid out in a certain order, not on top of each other, but side to side, and then players have the option of selecting where to fight. If this were the case there could be an action where you could move a unit to an unclaimed territory (similar to your optional Fortify rule). But once one person has "advanced fortified" the territory, the other player must battle in order to make an attempt at it.
2) Also, what if land trophy cards offered variable effects? For example, in a forest certain units received different bonuses, and others negatives.
3) This is a question more than anything, but how will the new warrior cards mix with the old ones? Will there be new symbols? Will the new and old cards be interchangeable?
4) Being a fan of 300 have War Elephants and such crossed your mind?
5) The fact that you're throwing out your ideas on this site and asking for player feedback is commendable in itself. Keep up the great work guys!
Eric
-
Peter
Canada
Port Coquitlam
British Columbia
Makers of Battlefields of Olympus
MoFo Max Payne Yo
-
Eric,
I do have some ideas similar to the one you mention in your first point. I'm sure there is something that will work like that.
I thought of and originally had variable powers on Land, but I found that managing the additional abilities and restrictions on the cards was tedious to remember as a player. The two new Land cards for the expansion have abilities, but I have chosen to constrain their influence to final scoring. Even the new Build Actions are constrained to simple abilities with a victory point modifier. I am choosing to keep the individual actions simple, prefering to keep the choices in how they are played.
The symbols and colors on the new Warrior cards will be the same as the original. This is necessary for game play clarity. You can certainly combine the two decks into one. Or, you might want to play with the distributions and keep the decks separate. Choosing to mix and swap some of the cards from each deck. For historical war-game fans, this might be sacrilegious, but I chose to go with flexibility over accuracy.
I'm inspired by anything from 300 or the battle scenes from Gladiator. The ballista could easily be turned into an elephant or rhino card. The decision on this isn't final. It really depends on what the artists want to do. Related to this, how do you feel about chariots? We have been toying with this image for the new Cavalry Warrior unit.
Thank you for your feedback and the compliment. We just want to make the best game possible.
-
Peter
Canada
Port Coquitlam
British Columbia
Makers of Battlefields of Olympus
MoFo Max Payne Yo
-
I forgot to include a few important details in the 4 player team game:
+ You may BATTLE any player, including your partner, when you choose to Sacrifice one of your Land Trophy cards (or play the Raid! Action).
+ When battling over the topmost Land Trophy card, you must select one of your opponents and NOT your partner.
JohnnySchmaser wrote: Thank you for the suggestions Grégory. I will keep them in mind. On another note, I would like to get some feedback from everyone on the 2 versus 2 team play design. You should be able to play 2 vs 2 teams with the base game. Teammates sit opposite of each other. The only other changes in rules would be the turn order moves in a clockwise direction, the next player is always to your left regardless of who lost the battle, and you can choose anyone to battle, including your partner. Yes, even your partner. Your partner may choose to give you any of his cards before the battle begins (and only before), as long as you do not violate your hand limit. The game winner is the player with the most points on the team with the most overall points. I hope that made sense. So in general, teammates will work together, but only to a point. NOTE: Only the 2 players directly involved with a battle draw Warrior cards at the end of the battle. What do you think? EDIT: Added the note about drawing Warrior cards and then restructured the rule description. EDIT: Added details about battling your partner using the Raid! Action.
-
Peter
Canada
Port Coquitlam
British Columbia
Makers of Battlefields of Olympus
MoFo Max Payne Yo
-
Rough draft of new Harbor Land Trophy card. More to come.
Illustrated by Shih-Kai Chang
Card Rules: Victory Points: (See Below), Number in deck: (3), Colors: (Red, Yellow, Blue)
During final scoring, add to your score, the total number of Warrior cards in your possession that you have the least number (with 1 Harbor), plus second least number (with 2 Harbors), plus third least number (with 3 Harbors)
Note: Game rules subject to change.
-
Zee Garcia
United States
Homestead
Florida
-
JohnnySchmaser wrote:
During final scoring, add to your score, the total number of Warrior cards in your possession that you have the least number (with 1 Harbor), plus second least number (with 2 Harbors), plus third least number (with 3 Harbors)
I'm not sure if it's just me, but I have no idea how this card scores based on how it's worded. The wording seems very unclear. Is it telling me to check my hand for the warrior type/title of which I have the fewest (say, two archers), and that's how many VPs the Harbor is worth? Would this check my reserve pile as well?
Maybe this (or something like it) could be a bit clearer?
During final scoring, the Harbor is worth points equal to the warrior type of which you have the fewest in your hand. Discard all cards of this warrior type.
Not sure if discarding the cards interferes with any other scoring, but this way it might help score more than one Harbor in a streamlined fashion. Ex: Score my first Harbor, 2 archers, so 2 points, discard them. For my second Harbor, I now have left 3 spearmen, so 3 points, then discard them, etc.
-
Peter
Canada
Port Coquitlam
British Columbia
Makers of Battlefields of Olympus
MoFo Max Payne Yo
-
Hi Zee,
You are absolutely correct. It certainly can be clearer and what you have described is. 
Thanks!
Peter
-
|
|
