"Favourite team vs team firefight resolution mechanics?" Topic
5 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 be courteous toward your fellow TMP members.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Game Design Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Showcase Article A cheap way to pick up on the latest fad and get your own dice cup for wargaming?
Featured Profile Article Need something to base your scenics on? Look in the craft aisle…
Current Poll
Featured Book Review
|
| Zelekendel | 19 Jul 2014 9:37 p.m. PST |
From WW2 to Infinity (tm), what is your favourite firefight resolution mechanism between teams / groups / squads (generally composed of 10 or less individuals) that takes into account attacker / defender skills, situational modifiers, and suppression / morale as a direct result of shooting? I'm familiar with the usual suspects: Chain of Command (which I do like), Force on Force (which unfortunately doesn't scale well with varying troop sizes), Stargrunt2, 40k and its ilk, as well as Rules of Engagement and various other WW2 sets. |
| Grumpy Monkey | 20 Jul 2014 5:43 a.m. PST |
I always found the rules from Rezolution to work really well |
 etotheipi  | 20 Jul 2014 11:42 a.m. PST |
With an obvious (publisher) bias, I like the QILS team combat system. It allows you to carry out group combat without losing the individual character of the skirmish game. From your list, the rules do not implement morale/suppression. The scenarios do. Specifically, victory conditions are constructed to drive players to decide when their units should behave defensively and how much. |
| Zelekendel | 21 Jul 2014 7:15 p.m. PST |
Hmm, I tried to crosspost, but the site was having problems, and now I see the crossposting didn't work. I'll just have to create duplicate threads in the relevant sections. Thanks for the suggestions so far. |
| Andy ONeill | 23 Jul 2014 10:29 a.m. PST |
|
|
