01-10-2012, 06:37 AM | #11 |
GURPS FAQ Keeper
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
|
Re: Mass Combat
You generally can't. At most, you can make armies have a HP score and a Damage score, with Strategy affecting the chance of a successful 'hit'. (This will also make different armies resolve battles at different rates depending on ratio of offensive to defensive capability.)
|
01-10-2012, 07:15 AM | #12 |
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Daegu, South Korea
|
Re: Mass Combat
I haven't looked at Mass Combat for a long time and can't remember enough to give much of a detailed idea here. But whatever, that's alright.
What about giving generals techniques to strategy with different types of forces (cavalry, armor, recon etc.). This would add a lot of depth to comparative skill of generals and also probably lead to making more rolls. Not sure how the rolling would change, can't remember the system enough.
__________________
“The limits of my language mean the limits of my world” |
01-10-2012, 07:35 AM | #13 |
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oregon
|
Re: Mass Combat
I'd be tempted to actually reduce the impact of Strategy / Tactics skills in the battle. For example, just like the overall stronger force gets a bonus to its roll, the general with the higher Strategy could provide a bonus (say, from +1 to +3 or so) based on how much more skilled he is. The roll itself would then be 10+modifiers for each side, instead of Strategy+mods.
|
01-10-2012, 07:50 AM | #14 | |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Europe
|
Re: Mass Combat
Quote:
To actually reduce the impact of skill differences, roll against (10+Skill)/2, applying modifiers to this averaged value. That screws over odd numbered skill levels, but still allows more skilled strategists to do more. |
|
01-10-2012, 07:53 AM | #15 |
GURPS FAQ Keeper
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
|
Re: Mass Combat
So if a force contains 25% Cavalry (of various sorts), 25% Skirmishers and 50% Riflemen, do you benefit from your Cavalry technique or not? (Just to demonstrate that the idea isn't all that simple.)
|
01-10-2012, 11:24 AM | #16 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
|
Re: Mass Combat
Quote:
Historical Mass Combat was often dominated by exceptionally talented generals, and amateurs and incompetents suffered incredible humiliations, so the RAW are probably a reasonably realistic simulation. None of this fixes the problem of the unrealistically valuable military skills in MC games, of course. My gut would be to just let the PCs shine, since "Great General" is a form of munching that I haven't explored much. Alternately, handicap them with the historical hobble of most great commanders - paranoid political elites. Many an army has got a substandard commander simply because the local bigwig didn't trust the good commander. |
|
01-10-2012, 11:28 AM | #17 |
Join Date: Nov 2010
|
Re: Mass Combat
You can also give any PC a familiarity penalty to their Strategy rolls for every 'first-time' they undergo in battle: first battle, first siege, first amphibious landing, first river battle. Historically, it makes sense and it's a good way to handicap that Jack-of-all-Trades barbarian from making your big bad general look like a chump. Unless that's what you want, of course.
__________________
Finds party's farmboy-helper about to skewer the captive brigand who attacked his sister. "I don't think I'm morally obligated to stop this..." Ten Green Gem Vine--Warrior-poet, bane of highwaymen
|
01-10-2012, 01:38 PM | #18 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
|
Re: Mass Combat
Quote:
Of course, 100 CP of military skills later she will conquer the Roman Empire using 14 syphilitic baboons with pointy sticks, but hey, powerful PCs do stuff like that. It's ok - you can always give one of the baboons a unfair grudge and have it assassinate her on the way out of the senate. - Et tu, Bobo? That's drama right there. |
|
01-10-2012, 01:43 PM | #19 | ||
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Fayetteville, Arkansas
|
Re: Mass Combat
Quote:
Also all elements the Misfortunate player is facing are 8-9 "fodder" with 1 boss. The fodder has 12-14 skill (since 15 is the mark where you start granting your side bonuses) but they get a Rapid Fire bonus on one attack (as per GURPS Supers) and the player defends against one attack per MoS of his defense roll. While the player is fighting the fodder I still consider the round several minutes but when he fights the commander rounds revert to one second. Quote:
No, I'd only allow it if your force had 50% Cav. but I'd do the techniques differently. I'd say their starting value would be Tactics (or strategy) +0 (rather than penalyzing tactics for being outside your specialization) and max of Tactics (or strategy)+4... thus your base planning skill doesn't change (which complicates the situation) yet you get a bonus for being within your specialization, which starts if half or more of the troops you control are your specialized troop type.
__________________
Last edited by Dwarf99; 01-10-2012 at 01:55 PM. |
||
01-10-2012, 07:26 PM | #20 | |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Europe
|
Re: Mass Combat
Quote:
Edit: Maybe "Combined Arms" should also be a legal Technique, each such being a fairly rigidly defined ratio of forces, such as 50/50 cavalry/archer? I think historically many armies were fairly uniform, meaning either all cavalry, or all infantry, or all archer, and making full use of a combined arms force was a rare ability. Last edited by Peter Knutsen; 01-10-2012 at 07:30 PM. |
|
Tags |
banestorm, mass combat, yrth |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|