 | | | | | | |
| |
|
I'm up for playing and as far as I can tell, the 13th sounds good. I can
also bring a few 'urban structures' with me.
Are we going to have teams? Also, might this game lend itself to hit points
(HP) since we will have very few units?
I've also been thinking...the new World City Police sets would work well in
this scenario, don't you think? Nothing like a bunch of underpowered,
annoying belligerent people mucking up our battles.
- Joe
"Shaun Sullivan" <shaun_sullivan@irco.com> wrote in message
news:HKA4JG.1KzE@lugnet.com...
> (In Monster Truck announcer voiceover)
>
> {[WATCH] ... as Jorge's speeding TurboCycle becomes a slagged heap of • burning
> plastic!!!}
>
> {[HEAR] ... Wayne's moans of agony as his stalwart troops are turned into • a
> steaming heap of minifig detritus!!!}
>
> {[SMELL] ... the fear and garlic pickle spears on Dan's breath!!!}
>
> {[FEEL] ... the tension as Joe calmly pulls out his *&%#&*) female Chakram
> chucker and tries to explain that she's been reborn as a Boomer!!!}
>
> {[EXPERIENCE] ... Bubblebrick Crisis!!!}
>
>
> So far, it looks as though September 13th works for people. As for • location,
> I'm more than willing to host, if people don't mind making a trek North. • I can
> also make sure that we have some adequate barbeque supplies, crock pot • eatables,
> and other foodstuffs so we don't have to worry about the 40 minute Pizza • run.
> We'd probably also need a couple of NELUG tables for the setup, as I have • space
> but no sprawling tabletops.
>
> If Brikwarring Amongst The BearsT seems a little too far out of the way • for
> people, we can also pick a more centralized location, and I won't be • offended.
>
> So far, we have interest from Wayne, Jorge, Dan, Jenn, and that dorky kid • with
> the shaved head. Anybody else? At the very least, it is imperative that • Joe
> Comeau divulge his secret uber-random team-formation algorithm, since my • schemes
> all took on the complexity of quantum machinery. And Joe, don't feed us • some
> line about how you drew names out of a hat, because I *know* there had to • be
> some sneaky mathematical basis for choosing ... don't worry, though, we • still
> have some time before we need to divvy out teams.
>
> By the way, Kudo's to Jorge for bringing his recent constructs to the • meeting
> Monday.
>
> Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions? Scalding Commentaries?
>
> -s
>
>
> > In Summary:
> >
> > DATE: September TBD, 2003
> > TL: 6
> > Budget per person: 150 CP
> > Teams: TBD
> > Environs: Urban
> >
> > Anything else?
> >
> > -s
> >
> >
> > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan wrote:
> > > > It's been far too long since we last played Brikwars. Dan's incessant
> > > > drooling over the prospect of another game had inspired my to stand • up, mop
> > > > off, and try to get the ball rolling. I mean, it's not as if we have
> > > > anything else on our plates at the moment, is it?
> > > >
> > > > So I'm soliciting ideas on what the next game should be, and be like. • I'm
> > > > throwing out an idea here, but I'd welcome support, refutation, or
> > > > alternative ideas:
> > > >
> > > > Tek Level: TL 5 or 6
> > > > Budget: 150 or 200 CP
> > > > Environs: Urban/City
> > > >
> > > > I've been on a big BubbleGum Crisis (http://www.megatokyobgc.net/) • kick
> > > > lately, so I'm envisioning different groups running around with • different
> > > > agendas. For example:
> > > >
> > > > Authorities: Trying to reign in mayhem and take down
> > > > disturbers-of-the-peace
> > > >
> > > > Vigilantes: Trying not to take down authorities or civilians, but • trying to
> > > > take down subversive elements
> > > >
> > > > Subversive Elements: Trying to accomplish their own evil ends, • couldn't
> > > > care less about authorities or collateral damage. Would also love the
> > > > chance to take down vigilantes
> > > >
> > > > And, of course, power armor, robots, and vehicles would be encouraged! • The
> > > > caveat is that with such a small budget allowance per player, these
> > > > represent significant investments. On the other hand, we can have • fast and
> > > > furious turns if everybody only has a couple of troops, plus we can • endow
> > > > each trooper with personalities that makes their unavoidable demise • all that
> > > > much more spectacular and painful.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau wrote:
> I'm up for playing and as far as I can tell, the 13th sounds good. I can
> also bring a few 'urban structures' with me.
>
> Are we going to have teams? Also, might this game lend itself to hit points
> (HP) since we will have very few units?
>
> I've also been thinking...the new World City Police sets would work well in
> this scenario, don't you think? Nothing like a bunch of underpowered,
> annoying belligerent people mucking up our battles.
HA! Exactly! Actually, you're one step ahead of me ... I was trying to devise
how we might operate with 3 teams, plus civilians. Each of the three teams has
different rules of engagement:
(1) Team ADP Police: may attack Team Villian and/or Team Vigilante, but must
also protect civilians
(2) Team Vigilante: may only attack Team Villian. May *not* attack team Team
ADP, and in fact should try to protect members of Team ADP and civilians
(3) Team Villian: do I even need to say it? Blatant disregard for all teams -
may attack Team ADP Police, Team Vigilante, and any civvies who stand in the way
between them and World Domination
(4) Civilians: Randomly controlled, except each team gets to roll a 1d6 at the
beginning of their turn, and can move that number of civilians however they like
(within reason). Therefore, Team ADP Police may move civilians into shelter,
and out of the conflict, representing fleeing citizenry seeking safety. On the
other hand, team Villian may have civilians "panic" and run in front of Team ADP
Police, into lines of fire, and so on. Team Vigilante will probably want to
have civilians in their control line up to receive autographs from the
Lawbreaking Justice Enforcers.
Actually, what Joe's saying is perfect, too ... the ADP Police were separate
from the regular police, so the World City Fuzz could be pleasantly bumbling and
comic, and fall under the "civilians" or "non-team" personnel!
Additionally, each team should probably have a goal that they're trying to
fulfill. Team Villian might be kidnapping a scientist or stealing data disks
from throughout the scientific quarter of the city. Team ADP might have to
protect as many citizens as possible, with whatever means necessary. And so on
... I'm happily looking for any ideas here.
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
"Shaun Sullivan" <shaun_sullivan@irco.com> wrote in message
news:HKA8z3.45v@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau wrote:
> > I've also been thinking...the new World City Police sets would work well • in
> > this scenario, don't you think? Nothing like a bunch of underpowered,
> > annoying belligerent people mucking up our battles.
>
> HA! Exactly! Actually, you're one step ahead of me ...
Naturally.
> I was trying to devise
> how we might operate with 3 teams, plus civilians. Each of the three • teams has
> different rules of engagement:
>
> (1) Team ADP Police: may attack Team Villian and/or Team Vigilante, but • must
> also protect civilians
>
> (2) Team Vigilante: may only attack Team Villian. May *not* attack team • Team
> ADP, and in fact should try to protect members of Team ADP and civilians
>
> (3) Team Villian: do I even need to say it? Blatant disregard for all • teams -
> may attack Team ADP Police, Team Vigilante, and any civvies who stand in • the way
> between them and World Domination
>
> (4) Civilians: Randomly controlled, except each team gets to roll a 1d6 • at the
> beginning of their turn, and can move that number of civilians however • they like
> (within reason). Therefore, Team ADP Police may move civilians into • shelter,
> and out of the conflict, representing fleeing citizenry seeking safety. • On the
> other hand, team Villian may have civilians "panic" and run in front of • Team ADP
> Police, into lines of fire, and so on. Team Vigilante will probably want • to
> have civilians in their control line up to receive autographs from the
> Lawbreaking Justice Enforcers.
Hmmm. I like this idea. I was thinking along the lines of what we did for
the TL6 modular game where there was two teams plus and "independent." In
this case, I was thinking the independent would be some mega-corporation
with some niffty Boomer-like weapons. Your suggestions above are more in
line with BGC, though.
I do like the general idea of a set of "rules" which the teams live by,
*but* I think the villians need one too. They must be there for a reason
and presumeably just wnat to get the job done (obtain new plans, remove some
politician who's reforms would hurt the company they represent, ingore
anything that isn't an immediate threat, must waste an entire turn before
destroying a vigilante unit explaining all of their diabolical plans so that
help can get their in time for a rescue, etc.).
> Actually, what Joe's saying is perfect, too ... the ADP Police were • separate
> from the regular police, so the World City Fuzz could be pleasantly • bumbling and
> comic, and fall under the "civilians" or "non-team" personnel!
Absolutely...and someone must bring a couple of helicopters...we can't have
BGC without having a copter or two blown from the sky.
> Additionally, each team should probably have a goal that they're trying to
> fulfill. Team Villian might be kidnapping a scientist or stealing data • disks
> from throughout the scientific quarter of the city. Team ADP might have • to
> protect as many citizens as possible, with whatever means necessary. And • so on
> ... I'm happily looking for any ideas here.
Well, I mentioned my ideas above. Although it would be fun if by doing
certain things, "CP awards" were given so that upgrades could be made for
future games. Saving a civilian earns you +2 CP, while destroying a Boomer
gets you +10 CP, etc. This way, you can use the same unit, but have the
ability to make it better the longer it survives. Presumably, this would
also apply to the villains in a reverse connotation. Just a thought.
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan wrote:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau wrote:
> > <snip>
>
> HA! Exactly! Actually, you're one step ahead of me ... I was trying to
> devise how we might operate with 3 teams, plus civilians. Each of the
> three teams has different rules of engagement:
>
> (1) Team ADP Police:
> (2) Team Vigilante:
> (3) Team Villian:
> (4) Civilians:
> ... I'm happily looking for any ideas here.
I have couple of thoughts on teams depending on whether we have 8 players or 9.
If we have 8 players then I would suggest having the civilians as a fourth team
dedicated to general annoyance. If we have 9 players then I would suggest 3
teams and have the civilians as random.
I would be more than willing to play the world city police officers and
civilians if need be, since I'm not much of a mech builder. Also I think I
could be good at being a general annoyance or even a major, but I draw the line
at being a private.
Jonathan
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau wrote:
> I'm up for playing and as far as I can tell, the 13th sounds good. I can
> also bring a few 'urban structures' with me.
I'm up for this game, but I don't know what I'll be able to build, since I'm not
to familar with Bubble Gum Crisis. I'm going to try and build an armored
minifig and a mech suit that should take the total 150cp.
> Are we going to have teams?
Could we set it up similar to the super heroes game where we all worked
together. If some one else is willing to work with me to come up with a good
opposing team, I would be willing to control them during the game in addition to
my one Mech. I'm very good at being netural when playing both sides.
> Also, might this game lend itself to hit points (HP) since we will have
> very few units?
Since I'm using all of my CP on one unit, I would prefer to use hit points so
that I can last longer than my usual 3 turns.
> I've also been thinking...the new World City Police sets would work well in
> this scenario, don't you think? Nothing like a bunch of underpowered,
> annoying belligerent people mucking up our battles.
I'm not familar with that set, but I think it would be a lot of fun to destroy a
Jack Stone Police Station or any of his other sets.
> "Shaun Sullivan" <shaun_sullivan@irco.com> wrote in message
> > If Brikwarring Amongst The BearsT seems a little too far out of the way for
> > people, we can also pick a more centralized location, and I won't be
> > offended.
To give the group options, I can also host so I'll leave it up to the group as
to where to have the game. If pizza has gotten tiresome, I have a grill in the
backyard that we can use if we want to bring food to cook. I think I can figure
out how to cook a pizza on the grill. ;-)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Jonathan Dallas wrote:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau wrote:
>
> > Are we going to have teams?
>
> Could we set it up similar to the super heroes game where we all worked
> together. If some one else is willing to work with me to come up with a good
> opposing team, I would be willing to control them during the game in addition
> to my one Mech. I'm very good at being netural when playing both sides.
I think there should definitely be teams ... much of the fun comes from pitting
your strategic prowess against that of the others. Besides, you of all people
should recall that even people who are supposed to be working together may
occasionally ... deviate ... and attack teammates!! And that is, truly, a
beautiful thing.
> > Also, might this game lend itself to hit points (HP) since we will have
> > very few units?
>
> Since I'm using all of my CP on one unit, I would prefer to use hit points so
> that I can last longer than my usual 3 turns.
I'm definitely up for this ... especially since most people will only have a
handful of troops, at most (and in some cases, only one!) Note that the
information on Hitpoints can be found in section 1.3 of the Brikwars rules.
Some things to keep in mind if we all decide to go this route:
(1) AV no longer has any application when you use hit points. Basically, if the
attacker fulfills the UR requirement, the hit *will* deduct damage from the
target. In this way, even a firebreathing dragon could be killed eventually
base on repeated punches.
(2) Mechs and vehicles, when destroyed, explode in a fireball with damage equal
to their AV (or their AV equivalent if hit points are also applied to vehicles,
which is a possibility). In many cases, this will still be enough to vaporize
characters, even if they have hit points. My suggestion: stay out of
unbelievably huge fireballs.
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
"Shaun Sullivan" <shaun_sullivan@irco.com> wrote in message
news:HKC743.15oD@lugnet.com...
> I think there should definitely be teams ... much of the fun comes from • pitting
> your strategic prowess against that of the others. Besides, you of all • people
> should recall that even people who are supposed to be working together may
> occasionally ... deviate ... and attack teammates!! And that is, truly, a
> beautiful thing.
Shaun, sometimes I have absolutely no idea of what you're talking about.
> > > Also, might this game lend itself to hit points (HP) since we will have
> > > very few units?
> >
> > Since I'm using all of my CP on one unit, I would prefer to use hit • points so
> > that I can last longer than my usual 3 turns.
>
> I'm definitely up for this ... especially since most people will only have • a
> handful of troops, at most (and in some cases, only one!) Note that the
> information on Hitpoints can be found in section 1.3 of the Brikwars • rules.
> Some things to keep in mind if we all decide to go this route:
>
> (1) AV no longer has any application when you use hit points. Basically, • if the
> attacker fulfills the UR requirement, the hit *will* deduct damage from • the
> target. In this way, even a firebreathing dragon could be killed • eventually
> base on repeated punches.
Absolutely! That's what makes it so cool in my opinion (yes, I actually
spelled it out, how quaint of me).
> (2) Mechs and vehicles, when destroyed, explode in a fireball with damage • equal
> to their AV (or their AV equivalent if hit points are also applied to • vehicles,
> which is a possibility). In many cases, this will still be enough to • vaporize
> characters, even if they have hit points. My suggestion: stay out of
> unbelievably huge fireballs.
And this is just icing on the cake!
Of course, you are also implying something here...in order to create our
power-suits (or mechs, potentially), we should be creating them as vehicles
and *not* as alternate species...correct?
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau wrote:
>
> "Shaun Sullivan" <shaun_sullivan@irco.com> wrote in message
> news:HKC743.15oD@lugnet.com...
>
> > I think there should definitely be teams ... much of the fun comes from
> > pitting your strategic prowess against that of the others. Besides, you
> > of all people should recall that even people who are supposed to be
> > working together may occasionally ... deviate ... and attack teammates!!
> > And that is, truly, a beautiful thing.
>
> Shaun, sometimes I have absolutely no idea of what you're talking about.
That reminds me, Can Joe and I be on seperate teams? I still have this stabbing
pain in my back from the last game. ;-)
Seriously though aren't dragon notrious for switching sides in a battle if it
means that get some shiney treasure?
<snip>
> > (2) Mechs and vehicles, when destroyed, explode in a fireball with damage
> > equal to their AV (or their AV equivalent if hit points are also applied
> > to vehicles, which is a possibility). In many cases, this will still be
> > enough to vaporize characters, even if they have hit points. My
> > suggestion: stay out of unbelievably huge fireballs.
Thanks Shaun for bringing up the Fireball aspect. You know how I feel about
fireballs. Hey do you think it would be possible to have an escape pod for my
pilot?
Jonathan
| | | | | | |
