by bluesheep
AlexFS wrote:
If you open the door to houseruling TM, then you might do the same to GP. The scaling of action spots could be easily achieved by a scaled down automa that blocks those in the 2p game, for instance. Same could be done for the tech tracks.
I would advise against this. We've tried a 2p game with an automa to simulate the 3p experience and I hated it. All this does is introducing random noise into the system - something that goes very much against the spirit of TM/GP.
Limitless333 wrote:
I like Gaia Project more simply because the factions feel very different mechanically more than they did in TM.
This is actually an excellent point! I dislike the missing lore (and the look of some of the new factions), but gameplay-wise they sure do offer very interesting individual styles.
KrazSaiko wrote:
Literally everything you say TM is equal to GP is through house ruling, meaning its not in the actual rules so how can that make them equal? That means GP improved those areas and TM had to have rules changed.
As I've clearly stated... but so what? The major house rules you need (reduced map size, dummy scores for network and cults) are all implemented easily (and I would argue that their inclusion in GP is a testament to how good they are) and don't actually change the experience in any unexpected way - on the contrary, they bring the 2p experience a little closer to the 3p+ games.
If you say you are not welcoming even small adjustments from the RAW, then that is your decision, I simply think that the 2p difference between TM and GP gets blown a little out of proportion at times and you can probably have the same (or a very simliar) experience in TM with just some small adjustments at zero cost.