combat system?
- Thread starter flykiller
- Start date
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
Given the Tech Levels you are discussing, STRIKER (for the Classic Traveller line) leaps to mind. It is available on the CT CD-ROM collection.
STRIKER plugs right into Traveller and has very interesting rules for fog of war/morale/commands.
STRIKER plugs right into Traveller and has very interesting rules for fog of war/morale/commands.
Last edited:
Striker, as Creativehum suggests. It's scale is rather low, however.
MT's Rebellion Sourcebook has a mass combat system which allows you combine the stats of individual troops to create large scale units, fight those units, take "damage", and then "unpack" the large unit applying the damage back "down" to the individuals involved. I never used it much beyond the "fiddling around stage", so I can't say how well it works.
Ground Zero Games has Star Grunt II and Dirtside II. Both are free, IIRC. The SG is a relatively simple skirmish scale rules set while DS adds lots of features while also increasing the scale. Here's a quote from Board Game Geek:
DS2's focus is on armored conflict but combined arms including artillery, off-planet starship batteries, air support and infantry including powered infantry are covered as well. A ton of wargame options (not everything is needed to play a simple game but it's nice to know you can do just about anything) are provided including minefields, paratroops or drop pod insertion, orbitall bombardment, and even nuclear weapons. Lots of options are in the rules sections but the game's still very playable using simple forces if that's your preference.
I've played more SG than DS. It's fun.
MT's Rebellion Sourcebook has a mass combat system which allows you combine the stats of individual troops to create large scale units, fight those units, take "damage", and then "unpack" the large unit applying the damage back "down" to the individuals involved. I never used it much beyond the "fiddling around stage", so I can't say how well it works.
Ground Zero Games has Star Grunt II and Dirtside II. Both are free, IIRC. The SG is a relatively simple skirmish scale rules set while DS adds lots of features while also increasing the scale. Here's a quote from Board Game Geek:
DS2's focus is on armored conflict but combined arms including artillery, off-planet starship batteries, air support and infantry including powered infantry are covered as well. A ton of wargame options (not everything is needed to play a simple game but it's nice to know you can do just about anything) are provided including minefields, paratroops or drop pod insertion, orbitall bombardment, and even nuclear weapons. Lots of options are in the rules sections but the game's still very playable using simple forces if that's your preference.
I've played more SG than DS. It's fun.
LeperColony
Traveller Card Game Dev Team
There's a guy on the local gaming convention circuit who has adapted SG to Traveller. It seems to work pretty well. His standard scenario is a platoon of Imperial Marines vs Zhodani Consular Guard with psionics and warbots.
Play was reasonably fast paced, which I enjoyed, and there was also the sense that your guys had enough "stuff to do."
I'm not sure how well it would work simulating asymmetrical TL engagements, but that might just be about how robust the Traveller conversion is.
Play was reasonably fast paced, which I enjoyed, and there was also the sense that your guys had enough "stuff to do."
I'm not sure how well it would work simulating asymmetrical TL engagements, but that might just be about how robust the Traveller conversion is.
That's part of the reason why, as good/fun as it is, SG might not meet Fly's needs. He wants something company to battalion size. SG, as well as Striker, is just focused too low.
Good point. SG models "kit" and/or TL differences through different size dice. Figures with bolt action rifles would roll d4s while troops with ACRs would roll d12s. I don't know if such a method would or could handle the TL gap Fly asked about.
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
Right. Striker mentions battalions, but I just looked back at the rules. There might be a battalion HQ... but really, it maxes out at the company level.
Also, depending on what flykiller is looking for, Starvation Cheap (for Star Without Numbers) has a very abstracted, very smart method of determining the outcome of battles with modifiers for different factors. It isn't about playing out the battle (which flykiller is probably looking for) but for quickly generating results based on relative strengths of the combatants in various qualities. I thought I'd mention it in case something like this might help.
LeperColony
Traveller Card Game Dev Team
TNE's World Tamer's Handbook has a Mass Combat System that it says scales up to division level. I've never used it. Looks like Mathhammer, to borrow the 40k expression.
The more I read SWN the more I find myself using the phrase "very smart method" for many of systems, ideas, and whatnot I find in it.
The Factions system in the core book is an entire game in and of itself. The espionage sourcebook, Darkness Visible, had me thinking about dozens of campaign ideas. The "friction" mechanic in the trade system in Suns of Gold not only varies the prices of goods, but generates also adventure seeds and plot hooks. I could on and on.
It's obvious that a lot of care and even more thinking went into SWN.
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
Kevin Crawford, a one-man-band, is doing some of the best work in RPGs today.
While Stargrunt would be a bad match, Dirtside would be pretty good - and the two systems are compatible so that you could zoom-in-and-out of different levels of focus if you wanted to. I've run both and found them a lot of fun and very easy to use.
(As an aside, they are compatible with Full Thrust, the starship combat game, but I don't think that specific rulebook is available online)
I actually for a long time ran my starship combat with FT, and ran a number of DS and SG games using a Traveller setup.
D.
(As an aside, they are compatible with Full Thrust, the starship combat game, but I don't think that specific rulebook is available online)
I actually for a long time ran my starship combat with FT, and ran a number of DS and SG games using a Traveller setup.
D.
Star Grunt, Dirtside and Full Thrust are still available at the Ground Zero Games site:
https://shop.groundzerogames.co.uk/rules.html
Well worth reading!
https://shop.groundzerogames.co.uk/rules.html
Well worth reading!
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
I guess the wargamer in me wants to ask what scale, TL and goal your fighting game is.
Most wargames, miniature or otherwise, have a scale- individual, fire team/squad, platoon, company, battalion, etc.
The usual space RPG mercs scale is going to be individual or small teams.
Is the goal to fight a battalion as individual units, platoon scale, or company scale?
A concurrent decision is are they to fight as a background piece to player fights and actions, seriously fighting such a unit, or just fighting the player's piece and abstracting the rest?
Most wargames, miniature or otherwise, have a scale- individual, fire team/squad, platoon, company, battalion, etc.
The usual space RPG mercs scale is going to be individual or small teams.
Is the goal to fight a battalion as individual units, platoon scale, or company scale?
A concurrent decision is are they to fight as a background piece to player fights and actions, seriously fighting such a unit, or just fighting the player's piece and abstracting the rest?
That's always the first question that should be answered. Until the scale is decided, everything else is moot.
While Fly mentioned company to battalion scale, he didn't mention how many individual units he wanted. A company can be represented by a single unit or by units representing the platoons (or lower echelon units) making up that company. The same could be done for a battalion; one unit or a large number of smaller units.
That's another important question. It boils down to whether Fly wants the PCs to effect or be effected by the overall combat situation.
I'm trying to decide on another story (assuming I do one and can still post), either based on lbb4 mission 4 cadre or on trying to advance the combat ribbon game. I have no ground combat experience so was hoping to learn enough to write something that wasn't stupid. I specified company because that would be the size of the cadre unit (though lower scale would be helpful as I envision scattered engagements), and battalion because that would be the environment in which the imperial marines operate and in which I would have to depict them.
Striker, the CT version, then. Or maybe Assault (Victory Games, but there's a newer edition) or the Squad Leader card game... the Squad Leader board game is a lifestyle pursuit, not a learning experience.
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
You mean a story like the Scout story, only Imp Marines ops?
If that is the case, then if you want to play it a character battle the Striker/Striker II games should suffice for their personal fight, but then we are left with a sideways question of the same sort for scale, this time storytelling rather then wargaming.
Are the larger ops going on intended to be background, or how the characters 'fight' their battalion they lead IS the story?
If the former, some abstracted thing of the sort Aramis is suggesting should suffice and concentrate on a fleshed out tactical fight for the characters' piece.
If the latter, then you probably want to think through the actual TL15 battlefield unit and how it operates, logistically politically and maximizing rapid decision while preserving the unit as much as possible.
If that is the case, then if you want to play it a character battle the Striker/Striker II games should suffice for their personal fight, but then we are left with a sideways question of the same sort for scale, this time storytelling rather then wargaming.
Are the larger ops going on intended to be background, or how the characters 'fight' their battalion they lead IS the story?
If the former, some abstracted thing of the sort Aramis is suggesting should suffice and concentrate on a fleshed out tactical fight for the characters' piece.
If the latter, then you probably want to think through the actual TL15 battlefield unit and how it operates, logistically politically and maximizing rapid decision while preserving the unit as much as possible.
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
That's where I was going with the scale question, depending on his goal it might be better if he 'futurized' some extant wargame system.
dunno yet. so far I'm thinking a squad pov would work best.
trying, can't. sort of like a roman legionary trying to envision blitzkrieg. doesn't seem possible, so far I'm envisioning wwi 90%+ casualty rates. ems/ecm seems key.
for the combat ribbon follow-on I'm thinking multiple engagements, each one more advanced, like what I had planned for the game. thought it would be a good game, but the players stopped posting so guess I was wrong. I'm thinking it actually would be a boring story - fight pause fight pause fight pause please end this - but perhaps an entertaining case study.
If you're wanting to use it for character narration, the difference between squad vs squad and platoon vs platoon is noticeable, but between Battalion and regiment isn't to most of the grunts; at that scale of combat, you're not changing the number of troops firing at any given soldier in a significant way. For the Officers, however...
Hell, the difference between 10-on-a-side medieval melees and 50 on a side (the largest I've been involved in) is also "Not much"... but 10 on a side Archers vs 20 on a side archers is HUGE. (Much above that, I suspect, and the experience normalizes.)
There's a reason most games are either "skirmish games" or "unit games"...
Even breaking out (heaven forbid) 40K:Rogue Trader can be of some use in learning to write combat better - if one pays attention.
Once you abstract from a 1 counter = 1 man, you lose the impact on the individual - even in striker, it's 4 men to a base, represented by 1 figure...
AHL is striker on a grid. It can be useful on a smaller scale (<platoon or 2), if you're willing to game out the situation, and doesn't have the command/control rules of striker (but those are easily added.)
Hell, the difference between 10-on-a-side medieval melees and 50 on a side (the largest I've been involved in) is also "Not much"... but 10 on a side Archers vs 20 on a side archers is HUGE. (Much above that, I suspect, and the experience normalizes.)
There's a reason most games are either "skirmish games" or "unit games"...
Even breaking out (heaven forbid) 40K:Rogue Trader can be of some use in learning to write combat better - if one pays attention.
Once you abstract from a 1 counter = 1 man, you lose the impact on the individual - even in striker, it's 4 men to a base, represented by 1 figure...
AHL is striker on a grid. It can be useful on a smaller scale (<platoon or 2), if you're willing to game out the situation, and doesn't have the command/control rules of striker (but those are easily added.)
