"What's a Game Designer to Do?" Topic
10 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 don't call someone a Nazi unless they really are a Nazi.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Game Design Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article How does coverbinding work?
Featured Workbench Article
Featured Profile Article Wargame groundcloths as seen at Bayou Wars.
Current Poll
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Ben Lacy  | 27 Mar 2016 5:11 a.m. PST |
link The link above announces the introduction of a new Russian MANPADS. How can a modern rules designer keep up with all the new weapons? |
 Herkybird  | 27 Mar 2016 5:32 a.m. PST |
Looks great in tests…I wonder how good it is in real combat situations! |
The G Dog  | 27 Mar 2016 5:44 a.m. PST |
Use a model that encourages annual codex updates to stay current? Or a newsletter/website to do the same? Harpoon had a quarterly journal IIRC. |
| Norman D Landings | 27 Mar 2016 6:38 a.m. PST |
Depends how 'crunchy' said designer wants to get. Frankly, I'd 'black box' it: what's important to the game is to know that Unit X has – for example – a 1D10 organic anti-aircraft value.
All we really need to know is it just went up to 1D12. |
| Martin Rapier | 27 Mar 2016 10:36 a.m. PST |
AA is usually a bit abstract anyway. So a bit more range, a bit more firepower. Maybe. |
| Weasel | 27 Mar 2016 4:59 p.m. PST |
It gets more confusing since a lot of weapon systems that are "on the market" has little or no battle testing. |
| Who asked this joker | 28 Mar 2016 5:52 a.m. PST |
A rebranded stinger? That's all you can really do until it gets tested in battlefield conditions. |
 etotheipi | 30 Mar 2016 7:41 a.m. PST |
I am reminded of an article in Guns and Ammo a few years back where an expert marksman used a period process restored Springfield and Enfield rifle and got statistically the same performance results. While not entirely comprehensive, but still a pretty solid test, it indicates that pretty much everything other than the equipment drove performance. Doctrine and supporting sensor/C2 systems would be a major limiting factor on system performance. What good does it do to be able to conduct an AA engagement with 98% accuracy at 125 miles if you can only get alerts at 80 miles? As above, tweak the stats. Probably based on best guess or desired effect rather than any empirical data. Consider tweaking things other than combat performance. Maybe the big difference is this is easier to support, repair, or more robust to damage… |
| Wolfhag | 31 Mar 2016 4:11 p.m. PST |
Any new and "improved" equipment coming from any country DoD should have a healthy malfunction check. Its not unusual for them to sell stuff before it's fully tested out. When testing a failure can be written up as a "Non-Test" to hide bad results. Wolfhag |
| Visceral Impact Studios | 01 May 2016 11:02 a.m. PST |
Forget the game design challenge. I hate the term "MANPADS". : -) |
|
