"Any ideas for emulating Jagged Alliance 2 as a minis game?" Topic
6 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 do not use bad language on the forums.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Pulp Gaming Message Board Back to the SF Discussion Message Board Back to the Modern Discussion (1946 to 2013) Message Board
Areas of InterestFantasy World War One World War Two on the Land Modern Science Fiction
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Top-Rated Ruleset
Featured Profile ArticleLittle skulls at the dollar store.
Featured Book Review
Featured Movie Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Rhoderic III and counting | 20 Feb 2015 10:45 a.m. PST |
Some of the most addictive fun I've had in any form of gaming, in any media or format, has been playing the classic computer game Jagged Alliance 2. The 80s/90s style "modern pulp" setting, that has you controlling a group of good-guy mercenaries as you gradually liberate a small, fictional Latin American nation from junta rule, is delightful (even if some out-of-place elements later on in the game ruin the atmosphere). But what really made the game memorable was the mechanics of gameplay. Does anyone have any ideas for how to emulate that in a miniature game? Maybe suggestions for existing rulesets? There are two aspects I'm especially interested in emulating. The first is a certain degree of micromanagement. I get that the action point system of JA2 is a bit much to copy in a miniature game. But to at least emulate the general effects of the action point system in a somewhat abstracted form would be necessary. For instance, there should be movement modes for running, walking and stealthy "crouch-walking", perhaps even crawling and sprinting from cover to cover (but then again the latter two might be a bit too much), each with its own obvious pros and cons in regard to distance, stealthiness, ability to perform other actions on the same turn, etc. A figure should get to shoot a greater number of times in a turn, and/or take better aim, if it does fewer other things on that same turn. Manipulating objects (such as opening doors) and performing various other special actions (such as throwing grenades or picking up items) should slow down the figure proportionately. Some actions like giving first aid might have to take several turns (providing drama as the injured figure and the figure giving first aid have to be protected by their teammates while the enemy temporarily has the upper hand). Figures should be able to get injured (lightly or seriously), fatigued and pinned (I don't remember whether JA2 had fatigue and pinning, but they sound like good inclusions anyway). A mechanic for interrupting enemy movement when they break cover would be necessary. I know many wargamers don't like Overwatch rules but in a game like this, where you're controlling individual figures breaking cover in separate instances, and not doing more abstracted squad-by-squad movement, it's needed. The second aspect that made JA2 addictive was the tactical manoeuvring and preparation that the player got/had to do immediately before and in between actual firefights. Some of the most fun moments I had in the game included: Positioning my fighters for the "perfect" ambush when enemy patrols were about; carefully moving fighters into position in order to storm locations held by a stronger but unwary enemy from several directions at once; deciding which way to approach a location that was likely (but not always certain) to have enemies; setting up snipers; setting up crossifre traps; sending in stealthy individuals to scout/explore enemy positions and take out lone guards (sometimes allowing for the rest of the team to sneak in after him – I should point out that whenever there wasn't a direct confrontation going on, the game switched from a turn-based mode to a real-time one, so the sneaking and exploring didn't get too tedious); clearing enemy-held locations building by building or room by room in such a way that in between "isolated" firefights you had to keep exploring, wary of running into ambushes, traps or rooms where the enemy had fortified themselves. Before anyone says it, yes I know I'm describing a style of gameplay that wouldn't work well in a player-vs-player format (unless possibly there's an umpire and all the players are VERY patient letting each other manoeuver in secret). So we're talking about something that would be played either solo, or in a player-vs-gamemaster format. Some other aspects of the computer game would probably be best to omit, such as the ability for fighters to pick up better weapons from dead enemies, unless one accepts that figures will not be WYSIWYG. I'll also point out that this is a "maybe" project for me, one of several of which I'll probably just pick one to go ahead with. But it's something I've been thinking about for years, and I've intended to post about it on TMP several times before. My catalyst this time is the Apocalypse Island range of figures at apocisland.blogspot.co.uk . Not that I'd necessarily game it in 28mm. |
Weasel | 20 Feb 2015 10:50 a.m. PST |
Nothing off the top of my head comes anywhere close. Would have to design something new from scratch. Given the encounters were always really small, I don't see an action point system as a problem. 1 AP = 1" movement, firing weapons i ndifferent modes takes different amounts of AP. You are probably correct that it'd work best as a GM'ed game. |
Rhoderic III and counting | 20 Feb 2015 2:14 p.m. PST |
Yeah, I'm afraid I'd probably have to make up my own rules, or do a very major conversion of an existing ruleset. Some rulesets may allow for the micromanagement of individual actions, and some may offer systems for "automated gamemastering" to control enemies and maintain a fog of war much like a computer AI in case one is playing solo. But I don't recall having ever come across a ruleset that allows one to do stuff like set up ambushes and crossfire traps in-game (not as part of a brief, highly abstracted pre-game deployment stage where the ambush or trap is the basic concept of the scenario to begin with) or sneak around scouting unsuspecting but watchful enemies to find optimal avenues of attack and sniper positions prior to actually assaulting them. That's the biggest of the stumbling blocks here, I think. I wouldn't even know how to begin designing something like that. Maybe I should just go for a standard gang-vs-gang concept that's all about overt combat, but some of the charm would be lost. |
Dawnbringer | 20 Feb 2015 5:26 p.m. PST |
You might want to check out Spectre miniatures new rule set. It seems to me to give that sorta JA feel though not as detailed. But I don't think that level of detail would really work in a war game anyhow. It would be more like modern sdndDnD |
Feet up now | 21 Feb 2015 8:21 p.m. PST |
I would use combatzone rules from EM4 . great set of rules already based on AP system and any special tasks ( healing ,overwatch etc..) can be slipped into the game mechanics as it is very adaptable. You are correct about the ambush and scouting from the game being very tricky to do in 1 v 1 game though :(. I was told about these rules years ago when we wanted to do battles similar to the old laser squad video game. For an action point based game this is our goto ruleset. |
Feet up now | 21 Feb 2015 8:23 p.m. PST |
|
|