Building a Better Warhammer Game (NPP Stay Out)
Moderator: Moderators
- deaddmwalking
- King
- Posts: 5352
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 11:33 am
Re: Building a Better Warhammer Game
NPP, I'm asking you not to participate in this thread.
-This space intentionally left blank
Re: Building a Better Warhammer Game (NPP Stay Out)
So while I agree that arbitrary, GM-defined Zones are a non-starter for a GM-less PVP wargame, I wonder if there might be something to the idea of player-defined Zones as a mechanic. Suppose there was a mechanic where the players take turns putting down terrain elements prior to the skirmish. Units can 'occupy' a terrain element for some benefit, typically it giving cover from ranged attacks or similar.
You could also have it set up such that every infantry unit in your army gives you an extra terrain placement (if you have three infantry, you put down two terrain elements on turns 1, 2 and 3) and every artillery you buy is placed as a terrain element and must be be occupied to be used.
If you do the placement rules right (cannot place terrain closer than X cm to other terrain and terrain placed outside your deployment zone must be within Y cm of two different pieces of existing terrain) you end up with something loosely approximating a triangular grid, which can then be used to decide melee engagement ranges, vision, artillery AoE and whatever else.
You could also have it set up such that every infantry unit in your army gives you an extra terrain placement (if you have three infantry, you put down two terrain elements on turns 1, 2 and 3) and every artillery you buy is placed as a terrain element and must be be occupied to be used.
If you do the placement rules right (cannot place terrain closer than X cm to other terrain and terrain placed outside your deployment zone must be within Y cm of two different pieces of existing terrain) you end up with something loosely approximating a triangular grid, which can then be used to decide melee engagement ranges, vision, artillery AoE and whatever else.
FrankTrollman wrote:I think Grek already won the thread and we should pack it in.
Chamomile wrote:Grek is a national treasure.
- deaddmwalking
- King
- Posts: 5352
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 11:33 am
Re: Building a Better Warhammer Game (NPP Stay Out)
I definitely feel that players placing terrain to give themselves advantage (or their opponent disadvantage) has to be part of play - though having a roll-off for table side would be interesting and has historical parallels (see Gettysburg and Waterloo for instance), I'm not sure what zone gives you.
What has been hard about measurements is normally you're not permitted to make them. When units have orbital support and laser inferometers, accurately determining distances should be permitted. Artillery should be able to determine if something is in range before declaring it a target. If you can measure whenever you want putting movement in inches or centimeters is probably just as easy as zones and avoids some of the potential ambiguities. It might also be nice to reserve zone for specific areas like a deployment zone or landing zone.
One of the painting channels I watch on YouTube is Goobertown Hobbies. The guy likes the models but not the game... I think his video is worth watching and sums up a lot of what I was feeling.
Warhammer 40k is NOT for Casual Players - YouTube
What has been hard about measurements is normally you're not permitted to make them. When units have orbital support and laser inferometers, accurately determining distances should be permitted. Artillery should be able to determine if something is in range before declaring it a target. If you can measure whenever you want putting movement in inches or centimeters is probably just as easy as zones and avoids some of the potential ambiguities. It might also be nice to reserve zone for specific areas like a deployment zone or landing zone.
One of the painting channels I watch on YouTube is Goobertown Hobbies. The guy likes the models but not the game... I think his video is worth watching and sums up a lot of what I was feeling.
Warhammer 40k is NOT for Casual Players - YouTube
-This space intentionally left blank
-
OgreBattleFight
- NPC
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2024 3:02 pm
Re: Building a Better Warhammer Game (NPP Stay Out)
I think indirect artillery, missile, bombs dropping from above, mortars, machinegun overwatch spraying could be treated like 'hazardous terrain' that affects units more when they're moving from one zone to another. So it can keep lightly armored but mission important troops pinned from advancing to mission important objectives. Close combat/Assault/Melee is then how your troops clear out the enemy troops from the zone.
Opposing Player's troops can be in the same zone/square, hiding or actively firefighting or attempting assaults or in chainsword melees with each other.
I guess small arms would be like... D&D melee attacks, and then the sci-fantasy swords and mega fists are like D&D grappling.
Bloodbowl has control zone rules where moving through enemy control area risks them tackling your guy (and they can succeed, fail, or both fall over). Perhaps overwatch fire can feel like that, getting into a firefight isn't just dealing damage but causing units to drop and seek cover instead of running by. Warhams is full of armored psychos though so some units choosing to just keep walking by has to be an option.
I figure some measurement can be done for how firefights and melee happen, so the advancing assault troops will get into sword melee with the closest unit. While some invisible winged ninja units have a rule to choose who they engage in melee in the zone/square.
So weapon ranges and effects I'm thinking of...
* Mortars, explosives, machinegunes create 'hazardous terrain' type tests for enemies moving in them.
- Marksmen, cannons can fire 1+ zone/squares away. With Some terrain set up at the zone/square edges can block sight with ways around it like spotters and psychic powers.
* Small arms create 'hazardous terrain test' type effect to enemies entering the same zone as them.
* Melee happens when guys choose to advance in instead of stopping for cover... how this happens is still being pondered, maybe you make a roll for fast guys to see if they get stuck in a firefight behind cover, or super ninja run into melee.
Opposing Player's troops can be in the same zone/square, hiding or actively firefighting or attempting assaults or in chainsword melees with each other.
I guess small arms would be like... D&D melee attacks, and then the sci-fantasy swords and mega fists are like D&D grappling.
Bloodbowl has control zone rules where moving through enemy control area risks them tackling your guy (and they can succeed, fail, or both fall over). Perhaps overwatch fire can feel like that, getting into a firefight isn't just dealing damage but causing units to drop and seek cover instead of running by. Warhams is full of armored psychos though so some units choosing to just keep walking by has to be an option.
I figure some measurement can be done for how firefights and melee happen, so the advancing assault troops will get into sword melee with the closest unit. While some invisible winged ninja units have a rule to choose who they engage in melee in the zone/square.
So weapon ranges and effects I'm thinking of...
* Mortars, explosives, machinegunes create 'hazardous terrain' type tests for enemies moving in them.
- Marksmen, cannons can fire 1+ zone/squares away. With Some terrain set up at the zone/square edges can block sight with ways around it like spotters and psychic powers.
* Small arms create 'hazardous terrain test' type effect to enemies entering the same zone as them.
* Melee happens when guys choose to advance in instead of stopping for cover... how this happens is still being pondered, maybe you make a roll for fast guys to see if they get stuck in a firefight behind cover, or super ninja run into melee.