"Incorporating minefields? " Topic
14 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please remember not to make new product announcements on the forum. Our advertisers pay for the privilege of making such announcements.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Collectible Miniatures Games Message Board Back to the Game Design Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral Fantasy Science Fiction Toy Gaming
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Recent Link
Top-Rated Ruleset
Featured Showcase ArticleThe Sovereign of Sweets and her entourage take their turn in Showcase.
Featured Profile ArticleThe Editor is fresh back from GenCon, one of the largest gaming conventions in North America.
Current Poll
|
joemethius | 11 Jun 2013 7:15 p.m. PST |
I've been working on a rules supplement for the clicky mechwarrior game because the core rules leave something to be desired when it comes to various terrain features. Does anybody have any info on how minefields are done in other games? Obviously different games can mean very different rules, and this game is pretty simple in comparison to many, but I'm just trying to get some general ideas. Here's a concise version of what I have so far: when entering, leaving or moving through minefield, unit must make a check roll to see if it trips a mine. Roll 1dX, add amount of inches moved that turn, if it's greater than X the mine goes off and unit takes X damage, then make another check roll to see if another goes off, repeating the process up to 3 times or so. Enemy fire that misses a unit in a minefield may also trigger mines by initiating a check roll. Is it common for mine explosions to trigger other mine explosions? Would it make sense to have another roll to see if the blast can be avoided, thus reducing/avoiding damage? Since this is a sci-fi setting the mines don't necessarily have to behave like modern landmines. Any ideas welcome! |
Rudysnelson | 11 Jun 2013 7:30 p.m. PST |
Minefields are tactically used to impede movement rather than destroying a target which is a bonus. The obstacle means that the attacker will have to revise their plans in the middle of an operation, thus allowing the defender to adjust fires onto their position. With that in mind, you have to decide if you are going to design a traditional minefield mechanic or modern-futuristic. A traditional minefield according to the US manual has a minefield composed of several types. For ease of design we will use the AT, AP, Mixed. They are as they sound. AT fields are fielded with large anti-tank mines which may not explode when grunts pass them. These are often deployed on roads and open areasa. The AP mine is anti-personnel which will wound or kill grunts but not affect many AFVs. A mixed field has both with in most cases the AP mines are placed to protect the AT mines from easily being dis-armed. In regards to mechanics, a lot depends on your scale. If using large units a delay in movement will often be the result of a minefield especially AP. AT mines will disable a tank especially with movement but not always the gun system. In lower levels, becoming pinned and possibly WIA/KIA is always possible. In a futruistic setting, the size and tech of mines can give the designer a lot of leadway on classifying lethality. Stating that types include sensor activated, magnetic, concussion or flash-bang, large tonnage all can increase the effects and lethality of the future minefield. |
joemethius | 11 Jun 2013 8:11 p.m. PST |
Thanks Rudy, that gives me a lot to think about. My initial thought was to have minefields be more of a sheer destructive force that catches you off guard
but there is plenty of destruction to be had during real combat. Now I'm leaning towards a more hindrance-oriented mechanic because it might add more choice and variety to a game. Disabling vehicle movement never occurred to me, and it makes sense assuming the mine explodes right underneath and breaks open a tank tread, wheel or mech foot. Maybe the location of the minefields will be hidden, randomly selected when one of several chosen spots is traversed. Makes you think twice about leading a tank down that narrow one-way pass, because it could get stranded with a broken tread, thus blocking everything behind it! |
skinkmasterreturns | 12 Jun 2013 2:46 a.m. PST |
For a sci-fi setting,how about instead of an explosive,the unit is tagged with nano sized targetting systems as it passes by,and any fire against it is much more likely to be successful. |
Martin Rapier | 12 Jun 2013 3:31 a.m. PST |
I would incorporate both hidden and marked minefields. Marked minefields are a very effective obstacle as people are understandably wary about entering an area with being 'Danger Mines!' signs on them. Hidden minefields are more generally of the booby trap variety or to deny particular terrain choke points, although in a modern environment, 'hidden' minefield might include those deployed by artillery/aircraft – the FASCAM type thing. Essentially mine fused cluster munitions. Any sort of minefield not covered by fire has at most nuisance value (apart from the poor sod who stands on the first one) as they can be cleared. Movement through any sort of minefield I slow and cautious, even with mine clearing equipment. To defeat grav/hover vehicles, proximity fuses & bouncing/fired mines might be appropriate. Both of the latter types were deployed in WW2, albeit mainly in an anti-personnel role (bouncing betties fired a shrapnel projectile into the air, pencil mines fired a bullet into your groin). |
Andy ONeill | 12 Jun 2013 9:11 a.m. PST |
Bouncing betties aren't much fun. There are targeted things nowadays though. Look up metal storm. Nightmare in a box, one option was a remote trigger. |
etotheipi | 12 Jun 2013 11:00 a.m. PST |
To simulate the hesitancy/risk dynamic, (in MW-clix gameS), I have allowed a defender to place 2 minefields on the board. A minefield is a stack of 10 cards from a deck. The defensive player secretly distributes ten face cards into the decks, then fills the rest of the deck with number cards. The decks are shuffled, and placed on the defender's half of the board. Any figure (or any attacker, if you want) that moves within 4" of a minefield draws a card. If the card is a face card, they take two clicks of damage, minimum of one after damage reduction. The overall 50/50 ratio of mines to non-mines allows for a sci-fi ability to detect/avoid mines. The ability to distribute the mines unevenly allows the defender to try to psych out their opponent. You can adjust a couple of things like the number of decks, the ratio of face cards to number cards, or have different damage levels (or other effects) for different face cards. Hidden [anything] I usually do with a deck of cards, too. Lay out the spades and clubs down two adjacent edges of the board to make a Cartesian coordinate system. Then before the game, select a pair of cards (hearts=clubs; diamonds=spades) to represent the hidden [whatever]. The person who hid the [thing] has to show the cards to spring it. Great for ambushes and hidden objectives, too. |
javelin98 | 12 Jun 2013 11:51 a.m. PST |
Land mine warfare was one of my specialties when I was in the Army. The point of mines, in general, is to reshape the battlefield, steering the enemy into an engagement area or away from someplace you don't want them to be (such as protective minefield on your unit's flank). A "fix" minefield is specifically intended to slow the enemy down in-place so you can destroy them with pre-plotted artillery and direct fire. Minefields are mostly psychological weapons. Once we were laying a 3 km long series of fields and we ran out of mines. So, we laid the first two rows of mines and then ran out to where the rest of the rows should have been and stuck spare tilt-rods in the ground. In the end, it worked -- the OPFOR turned away rather than try to breach! In game terms, if you're using any type of morale rules, encountering a minefield should cause a significant impact to morale or command/control. If there are no morale rules in play, then I would make the minefields sufficiently deadly as to make the players think twice about trying to cross them. As for fratricidal detonation, that likely wouldn't happen unless the engineers linked mines together with det cord or electric caps. Another thought for simulating the psychological effects of minds would be to put out twice as many mine counters as you have actual minefields, with half the counters marked on the underside as "DUMMY". |
Aldroud | 12 Jun 2013 12:21 p.m. PST |
Let me expand on that a bit. There are four main types of mine/obstacles used in the army. The disrupting obstacle, the delaying obstacle, the turning obstacle, and the blocking obstacle. A disrupting obstacle is one that, well, disrupts an enemy formation. Some vehicles get blown up, some get disabled, some get slowed down dodging tilt rods, and some speed through. In game terms, if a formation rolls through, I'd have some mechanisim where some might be disabled, but all have to randomly check how far they move through/past it. The delaying obstacle is used to slow down an enemy formation, allowing more time for direct fire assets to attrit the enemy. For games, see above, but have the distance a marked decrease from normal. Might add a bonus to direct fire as well. A turning obstacle forces an enemy formation to move in a particular way. Typically used to shape a kill zone and expose enemy vehicle flanks. I'd treat this as a disrupting obstacle, but the direction they move in is determined by the obstacle belt. Finally there's the blocking obstacle. What I think most people think of as a mine field. Enter and die. Or not, there's always a chance you'll miss something. But to safely pass through, the enemy needs to clear a path with either engineers or use 'the Russian method'. |
Aldroud | 12 Jun 2013 12:25 p.m. PST |
@Javelin88, When I was in Korea, we were defending a defile. Since I had a reduced Infantry platoon and only 2 Bradleys, we decided to get tricky. I had my men raid a tire dump nearby. They laid out stacks of tires three high all through the open fields. When the OPFOR tanks came up, they stopped, turned, and ran right into a telephone poll (made out of concrete in Korea). Referee laughed and said he had to kill them for stupidity. My two BFVs, meanwhile, shredded the rest of the OPFOR scouts and we went on to win the battle. The tires were nothing more than tires in the field. It just weirded out the OPFOR commander. |
OSchmidt | 13 Jun 2013 9:22 a.m. PST |
In my "The Shattered Century" 1930's to mid early WWII I use a hexagonal grid with 12" between the paralell sides of the hexagon. Into this you can, if you have them, deploy minefields. The mine-field is a simply a printed buisness card sized card with the name MINES on it and with an illustration of what looks like lumpy ground. If a unit enters a minefield hex it mus Stop and it gets to be fired on "by the minefield" as it were at the rate of 4-5-or 6 being a hit. The unit can move off next turn. I also have obstacles the same way. Only this time the unit is stuck so you have to roll a 4-5-6 to leave the hex. If you mine your obstacles the unit gets fired on each turn and has a chance to be kept there into further turns and be hit again. Not the most sophisticated but it works very well and it's especially good at its realistic mission, denying the enemy the ground as few player venture to plough right in. Combat engineers, if you got em, can move on, take their hits if the die rolls are bad and on one turn if they rolla 4-5-or 6 can remove the obstacle of their choice. |
javelin98 | 14 Jun 2013 2:18 p.m. PST |
@Ditto: Depends on a number of factors: if the mines are surface-laid or buried, if they have been installed with antihandling devices (AHDs), if they have tilt-rods or other ezposed fusing mechanisms, etc. Many newer mines are substantially shock-proofed to reduce accidents and make them more resistant to countermine operations. In WWII, if you could see a mine and hit it with a .303 or larger round, you could probably set it off. Indirect fire would clear a small patch (maybe 10m radius, at most) if it were fused for airburst, maybe 1 to 2 meters off the ground. In either case, you probably wouldn't be able to clear much faster than deploying a flail tank or a sapper squad with hand-placed explosives. WWII tech would include Bangalore torpedoes, and those might have been effective in clearing a modest path. |
joemethius | 14 Jun 2013 8:51 p.m. PST |
So much great info here! What a cool community. |
|