Re: [NetEpic ML] Game comparisons

From: Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...>
Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2001 10:51:04 -0400

Hi!

Weasel Fierce wrote:

> Hi there
>
> Tinkering with designing rules as I always am (I am on a rather constant
> quest to find some brilliant skirmish rules set of my own creation) I would
> like to hear from some of the veterans on this list
>
> What I need is some short descriptions and examples of how various game
> systems work.
>
> Those I have an interest in are Stargrunt, Void, Wor (the game made by
> FASA..it may be spelled Vor), Battleground WW2 and first edition Warzone.
> I am especially interested in comparisons with the rules mechanics of
> Warzone 2nd edition and Warhammer 40K (2nd and 3rd editions)

Warhammer 40k, IMO, is lacking becuase:

1. D6 system, there are just too many variables in a skirmish level game
so as to make a d6 too small a dice to effectively represent a good
range of probability.
2. Morale is not all that important and they generally tend to be too
high to make a game impact, also it doesn't really affect the troops
behavior in combat, until they fail a roll.
3. You-go-I-go mechanics, GW is perhaps the only company out there using
this antiquated design, activation based games are clearly superior,
since both players are more ivolved in the game and both players can
still win if iniative is lost. I have seen too many first turn knockouts
due to one side winning initiative.
4. Rules leave to many loopholes, in no version can GW ever attempt to
clear problems between "irresitable force versus immovable object"
controversies. If you make a weapon that ignores "x" and a defensive
weapon that ignores "y", you should mention how they affect each other.
5. Its a skirmish game, why does GW insist on rules for vehicles like
baneblades and even titans? If you like that you're playing the wrong game.

Stargrunt, is perhaps the best sci-fi game out there. Morale permeates
all levels of the game, from troop performance to ability to exwcute a
mission. Its drawbacks are a lack of a point system and its NOT heroic
sci-fi, you try 40k tactics here and you will die, results are very
realistic.

Vor, Void and Warzone are comparable games in the sense that they use
activation systems and d10 dice. They each have their own "flavor" and
the games are pretty simple with fewer loopholes. I'd use these systems
as a template for what a good skirmish level game should be.

>
> If anyone bother I would also like similat things on "epic" scale
> games...most likely Dirtside but others as well, compared to NetEpic, AT/SM
> and E40K

There is not that much out there nowadays, besides epic and its variants
only DSII comes to mind for sci-fi. DSII is a great game, but again its
real sci-fi not heroic sci-fi like epic, so things die quick when you
use unrealistic tactics. DSII also has great morale rules, again morale
affects everything, you know when your facing green or veteran troops,
it has a concrete game effect unlike epic where morale is abstracted to
the point of not having much of a game impact. Weapons are place in
logical categories such as anti-personnel and anti-armor. Weapon systems
are placed in broad categories like "laser" or "Plasma". Its strongest
point is its unit construction system, where you can literally make
everything. Its only drawback is a chit system for damage, but there are
net based resources that go around this.

Peter
Received on Sun Apr 08 2001 - 14:51:04 UTC