01-12-2019, 11:58 AM | #21 | |
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Lancaster, PA
|
Re: Additional Iron Mountain scenarios?
Quote:
I'm gonna have to read that a few times to digest it all, but will do my best to get back to you ideally today, but absolutely before the weekend's out.
__________________
Andy Mull MIB Agent #0460 Ogre 134th Battalion Lancaster, PA Imgur: https://agent0460.imgur.com/ |
|
01-12-2019, 08:52 PM | #22 |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Minnesota
|
Re: Additional Iron Mountain scenarios?
I expect all M2 terrain rules are going to be scenario-specific.
|
01-13-2019, 11:14 AM | #23 | |
Join Date: Dec 2016
|
Re: Additional Iron Mountain scenarios?
Quote:
For my own scenario designs, I'm planning on sticking with a core set of terrain rules so I can just proceed with designing a variety of scenarios.
__________________
All-Purpose Gaming Blog: Goblinhall |
|
01-13-2019, 04:18 PM | #24 |
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Lancaster, PA
|
Re: Additional Iron Mountain scenarios?
Partial thoughts (because I've been distracted by fighting with my bank to get a 'suspicious activity' flag resolved so I can get the rest of the stuff I need to repair the heating system in the kitchen):
Now I see where you're coming from. Thank you, that was bugging me...and I see the argument at play: not "These are beyond the complexity level of Ogre", but "These are beyond the scope of the rules tier (as you've defined them in 'where you're coming from') being suggested". Cool, I can work with this. If it was just related to M2, we wouldn't even be having the conversation, because of how unique that map is. For what it's worth, I'm thinking in terms of "As part of translating this rule that is currently specific to a scenario and its special map into something to be used for overlays, included on G4+/S4+/M6+, etc...is there value to be had in loosening the movement restrictions to allow a subset of units through, and if so what form would that take to make them distinct from already-existing terrain types". Personally, I think there is...not unlike how the movement restrictions on a Forest open up the possibility for Heavy Tread units to go through while GEV craft go around, and the tactical headaches that presets (able to 'scrape off' GEVs, or catch up to a set that's trying to get away). And as long as we're fawning about the abstracts that make Ogre able to survive 40 years...I really, really appreciate that it has a small but powerful glossary. Compared to something like Alpha Strike, Ogre has an extremely minimalist set of keywords, which makes it really easy to communicate both new one-off terrain and 'quick reference' tables...off the top of my head, terrain has only 8:
That's it. Unless I've missed something, those 8 traits cover the entirety of the official terrain effects ruleset (Mountains via Iron Mountain add a 9th: Blocks LOS, no unit can fire over this terrain feature). Every hex, every hexside, applies (or in the case of beaches, removes) them in one combination or another. That in turn is how I came up with the language of "Infantry delayed, others prohibited" and "Infantry Slowed / Defense +1, others prohibited, blocks LOS, Destructible". For the time being...let's completely sidebar the 'Destructible' conversation for now, 'cuz I think we can have a good conversation going about just the rest.
__________________
Andy Mull MIB Agent #0460 Ogre 134th Battalion Lancaster, PA Imgur: https://agent0460.imgur.com/ Last edited by TheAmishStig; 01-13-2019 at 04:36 PM. |
01-13-2019, 09:18 PM | #25 |
Join Date: Dec 2016
|
Re: Additional Iron Mountain scenarios?
Alas, I didn't get to take my M2 map rules for a test spin today as planned. Both other players had to cancel. Started a new post with the first draft of my rules so it will be easier to follow comments and feedback: http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread.php?t=161580
__________________
All-Purpose Gaming Blog: Goblinhall |
01-14-2019, 04:34 PM | #26 | |
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Lancaster, PA
|
Re: Additional Iron Mountain scenarios?
Quote:
At this point, I have to track down MOOSE...it hasn't been a kind few months for getting a group together, and even then it'd be nice to have a way to playtest scenarios to get them out of the 'so raw they're not ready for the group' stage.
__________________
Andy Mull MIB Agent #0460 Ogre 134th Battalion Lancaster, PA Imgur: https://agent0460.imgur.com/ |
|
01-16-2019, 08:26 AM | #27 | |
Join Date: Dec 2016
|
Re: Additional Iron Mountain scenarios?
Quote:
Looking over Andy's thoughts, here's my commentary on them: *Cliff: Infantry delayed, others prohibited* I've gone with the same effect, but stated as +1MP to cross. Infantry only move 2, so the end result is the same with less wordage. Also leaves open the possibility of houseruled Jump Troops with 3 MP who also get slowed for crossing but not delayed. *Mountain: Infantry Slowed (2MP/hex), Infantry +1D, Cannot Fire Beyond, others prohibited.* This really depends on the tactical flavour you want for playing on the map. This could work well for some scenarios. 'Infantry only' makes a very large and central portion of the map usable only as an infantry slug-fest. 'Infantry slowed' doubles down for a very slow moving infantry slugfest with everyone only moving 1 hex per turn once they're in the mountains. When you are looking for a slow moving infantry slug-fest, these rules would do the trick. It does open up some tactical intrigue of reinforcements circling round on the road before ascending into the fray. I think you mean D Doubled? *Upon Terrain Destruction: Fixed 1-2 against all units in the hex* That's certainly a simple way to handle danger to units. I avoided that in the first draft of the rules I'm starting with just for simplicity's sake. I'm aiming to keep the new rules to a minimum to start with on my playtesting just to avoid overly encumbering game play. I may well add this sort of idea later after I get a feel for how games are actually going and can start weighing how much more to add. *Replace with 'Damaged Mountain' overlay, which is identical to Mountain except grants +2D. Like all 'Damaged' overlays, all forms of road are automatically cut.* I would go with D Tripled if undamaged mountains are doubled.
__________________
All-Purpose Gaming Blog: Goblinhall |
|
01-16-2019, 11:15 AM | #28 |
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Lancaster, PA
|
Re: Additional Iron Mountain scenarios?
I'll have to dwell in depth later (yay lunch breaks!), but I do indeed mean a flat +1 and +2. It was something that appeared in a map-bashing guide somewhere, as a suggestion for when no bonus doesn't work, but a multiplier was too much.
It was one of those difficult "The cover isn't going to be anywhere near as dense as woods or a town, so is a multiplier really appropriate here?" style decisions...I couldn't craft an argument in favor of a bare, jagged mountainside providing as much cover as a town or woods.
__________________
Andy Mull MIB Agent #0460 Ogre 134th Battalion Lancaster, PA Imgur: https://agent0460.imgur.com/ |
01-17-2019, 10:27 AM | #29 |
Join Date: Dec 2016
|
Re: Additional Iron Mountain scenarios?
Umm, each infantry squad starts with D1. +1 and +2 is the same as doubled and tripled, but just uses inconsistent language.
__________________
All-Purpose Gaming Blog: Goblinhall |
01-17-2019, 10:50 AM | #30 |
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cheltenham, PA
|
Re: Additional Iron Mountain scenarios?
I think he means +1 or +2 to the entire unit, so while you're correct for a single squad, a platoon would be either D4 or D5, not D6 or D9. IIRC, that's how Infantry trenches (or whatever they're called - I can't remember right now), that CE's can dig, work...
__________________
Joshua Megerman, SJGames MIB #5273 - Ogre AI Testing Division |
|
|