Subject:
|
Re: brikwars...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.gaming
|
Date:
|
Thu, 20 Apr 2000 12:27:46 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
(wubwub@wildlink.)antispam(com)
|
Viewed:
|
1541 times
|
| |
|
|
"Mike Rayhawk" <mjr22@cornell.edu> wrote:
> > ...I found the weapons a mess to deal with. We were always trying to remember • what the
> > weapons were (2 pieces is impact pistol or gyro pistol?) and then figuring
>
> Well, the whole 'pieces' thing is just a suggestion, if you have some other
> way to keep track of which pistol (or any other type of weapon) is which then
> of course feel free to use it.
...The pieces thing is a great idea, conceptually, it makes it easy to tell weapons apart
without making them all the exact same... It just didn't work rite in practice...
> out the to-hits
> > and ranges and damages for assorted different weapons. And we never could • remember exactly
> > what major guns were on our mecha... and what ranges things shot at were • weird and all
> > over the place...
> >
> > ...The net result is we spent valuable play time looking up things :-/
>
> Yeah, that can be a problem the first few games. What you'll want to do is
> draw up a 'spec sheet' for each of your big vehicles, so you have all their
> weapon stats handy along with their Move and Armor ratings. As for regular
> troops, if you aren't used to all the different weapons yet, each player
> should try to equip his troops in a fairly similar fashion to limit the number
> of different weapon types to keep track of.
...I wanted to avoid paper as much as possible, mostly in the spirit of the game. BW is
about figs and dice and blowing things up, not paper. When I played WH40K, all the little
index cards with stats used to drive me crazy! (crazy to the point that I stopped playing
cuz too many little variations in basic weapons and fig stats that it was impossible to
keep up...
...Another reason I proposed the streamlining thing was to make it lots easier to throw
together a quick battle. Sure if you prepare before hand you can have stats cards ready,
but if u just are sitting around a table with some figs and some dice there should be some
easy way to play a battle without much trouble. imho at least.
> > ...So anyway, I propose a streamlining of the weapons. It does take some • variability from
> > the game, but replaces it with simplicity to make the games go a bit faster • so you can
> > concentrate on mass killing the opponent!
>
> To some extent I feel the same way, but I would get so many complaint letters,
> I'll never do it. Even now people are always mailing me wanting me to make
> more and more specific stats some random and esoteric weapon or another.
> There's nothing stopping you from just refraining from fielding a lot of
> different kinds of weapons though, if you want to simplify your life.
...This borrowed also from my old GURPS supers days. In GURPS, the rules didn't define how
the powers worked, just some broad concept on basic stats (to hit/damage/etc). Perhaps
define 3 basic weapon classes, then optionally lots of mods to those basic ones so people
could tune the basic weapon to reach the end concept they wanted? If they want flame
throwers, buy the 'flamethrower' option to the basic rifle.
...IMHO, this would leave the players able to come up with weapons specific to their
army/race/whatever. To an extent, you start that path with close combat siege weapons.
Take that concept to a compleation and use it in the other weapons categories. Define
basic stats for certain classes, then mods and etc for 'special effects' and whatever...
...oooh... now I'm percolating :-)
> > ...For vehicles, I propose simplifying the weapons there too. Rather than • list different
> > weapons, have larger weapons just be increments of a basic weapon. A MKIII • laser is just
> > 3x a MKI laser.
>
> Nothing stopping you from buying three MKI Lasers and firing them all at the
> same time, either.
...well, true :-)
> I agree with your sentiment that the game is way too complicated in some
> regards, but all these extra stats and equipment and rules and everything
> else, they're just provided as options, nobody has to use them if they don't
> want, and a simple, straightforward standardized army is not really at any
> significant disadvantage to a super-customized and specialized army. It just
> depends on each player's comfort level with how much complexity he's willing
> to put up with.
>
> > ...lastly, squads:
> >
> > ...We had a couple times where we all ganged up to take down things.
> > This isn't such a bad thing, but doesn't seem right. So how bout squads
> > be identified either by the colour of the plate they stand on, or a
> > group of the same type figs, etc... Only members of the same squad can
> > gang up to fire on a single target. Multiple squads can all fire at the
> > same target, but they cant combine together.
>
> The boys over at NELUG used a similar rule and I wrote it into the next
> revision as soon as I heard about it. I'll quote it here for you so you don't
> have to wait for the html revision (which would probably be about a month or
> two unless something goes wrong). It's an optional rule under 3.3.1:
> Cumulative Damage / Combined Fire.
>
> <begin quote>
>
> Optional Rule: Organized Attacks
> You may decide that soldiers can only do Cumulative Damage if someone
> organizes the operation - combined assaults cannot happen at random. In this
> case, a minifig may only order a combined attack if:
>
> - he is a Squad's communications officer (he has a radio), in which case any
> member of the squad within shouting distance (8") may take part in the
> combined attack;
> - he is piloting a vehicle with radio communication, in which case any other
> vehicle with radio communication may join him in a combined attack;
> - he is a Hero, a Champion, or an authority figure in general, in which case
> he can order any subordinate units within communication range to join in a
> combined attack. Communication range will vary depending on the communication
> equipment used (2.4.2: Equipment).
>
> <end quote>
...Sounds good to me! With the Comm officer, I'd say that if he gets shot, his radio falls
and the next nearest guy in his squad automatically picks it up (perhaps they all have
small transceivers and the next guy in line automatically gets promoted to comm officer).
This would prevent the comm officer from being too much a target :-)
> Are there going to be any battle report pages?
...Eventually :-) I'm slow :-)
...you can go back to ignoring me now...
wubwub
stephen f roberts
wamalug guy (http://wamalug.org)
wildlink.com
lugnet #160
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: brikwars...
|
| (...) The organized attack rules might be good for lower Tech Level games, but at higher levels I would think nearly anybody would be able to organize a combined attack. From the upper end of TL4 and higher I'd say that nearly every soldier would (...) (25 years ago, 20-Apr-00, to lugnet.gaming)
| | | Re: brikwars...
|
| (...) It's something that takes some getting used to. The important thing is to have a way to tell them apart when you need to, the method isn't really that important. (...) Did you really think so? I'll make a note to put siege weapon ranges up for (...) (25 years ago, 22-Apr-00, to lugnet.gaming)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: brikwars...
|
| (...) what the (...) Well, the whole 'pieces' thing is just a suggestion, if you have some other way to keep track of which pistol (or any other type of weapon) is which then of course feel free to use it. out the to-hits (...) remember exactly (...) (25 years ago, 20-Apr-00, to lugnet.gaming)
|
28 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
