"What vehicle stats do people like to see?" Topic
13 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 that some of our members are children, and act appropriately.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Interwar (WWI to WWII) Message Board Back to the 6mm Sci-Fi Message Board Back to the 15mm Sci-Fi Message Board Back to the Victorian SF Message Board
Areas of Interest19th Century
World War One
World War Two on the Land
Science Fiction
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Recent Link
Featured Showcase Article Tod gives us another look at his "old school" Boxer Rebellion figures.
Featured Workbench Article If the AI doesn't know the Vietnam War, does it know Star Trek?
Featured Profile Article The Editor is invited to tour the factory of Simtac, a U.S. manufacturer of figures in nearly all periods, scales, and genres.
Featured Book Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
| tsofian | 28 Feb 2015 3:03 p.m. PST |
As Arun and I work forward on the land fighting machines book we are wondering which stats we should publish for each vehicle. We'll be doing game stats for The Sword and the Flame (and its major variant The Hive and the Flame), but the question is what "real world" stats are needed, which are moderately important and what are just chrome? |
| Twoball Cane | 28 Feb 2015 4:03 p.m. PST |
Tank triad…armor, gun, movement Crew skills |
| tsofian | 28 Feb 2015 4:52 p.m. PST |
Range? Trench crossing? Vertical Obstacle? |
| arodrig6 | 28 Feb 2015 5:37 p.m. PST |
Reliability was a big issue for early tanks in WWI, but is it something that people would want in a game, or is that level of detail just annoying? |
| Lion in the Stars | 28 Feb 2015 10:39 p.m. PST |
gun(s), armor, trench crossing capability, speed, range A general comment about reliability would be nice, but isn't really necessary in most games. |
| tsofian | 01 Mar 2015 10:33 a.m. PST |
For the most part the rules you use will determine reliability, although we can certainly add a generic reliability modifier of some sort. We are going to have some machines that are designed to be "dogs" that will have serious issues |
| Lion in the Stars | 01 Mar 2015 12:31 p.m. PST |
Oh, I should have added vertical obstacle and maybe ground clearance to the list of specs. As far as a reliability descriptor, I'd like a standardized phrasing. So the real dogs would be something like "particularly/extremely poor" or "notably unreliable" followed by a specific clause like "transmission troubles" or "throws tracks frequently and is hard to work on". |
| spontoon | 08 Mar 2015 3:49 p.m. PST |
Stats desired would depend on the time scale of the game involved… |
| tsofian | 08 Mar 2015 3:57 p.m. PST |
Spontoon
We are looking at the "real world" stats. This way they can be converted to any game system you want! |
| arodrig6 | 08 Mar 2015 6:29 p.m. PST |
Lion – We actually can provide estimated FIT rates for all the major systems. Would that be what you're looking for? |
| Lion in the Stars | 09 Mar 2015 1:20 p.m. PST |
You mean estimated time before failure? That might work. |
| arodrig6 | 09 Mar 2015 8:27 p.m. PST |
Lion – yup we can provide both MTBF (mean time between failures) and FIT (Failures in time). |
| Lion in the Stars | 10 Mar 2015 9:50 a.m. PST |
MTBF and FIT might actually be more detail than players really need. After all, what you really need to know is how likely that piece of equipment is to fail in the next hour. |
|
