etotheipi | 04 Oct 2020 9:19 a.m. PST |
Do you play milieu or campaigns (I guess "games", too) where you deliberately use a subset of the rules as a matter of defining the broad context of the game? So, I don't mean do you not use all the rules and special rules (and special special rules) every game. Do you decide, "these bits are part of the rules, but do not apply to our milieu, so we won't ever use them." An example: Gangs of Mega City One is in a scifi, dystopian, near future (actually, retro near future as the milieu is set twenty years ago but was written forty years ago) setting. So in addition the ultra-violence and postapocalyptic setting, there are lots of cool scifi gadgets and weapons in the mix. But beyond all that, the campaign and game system in the rules sets up a nice gang warfare environment. And if you strip away the scifi elements (not just gear, but rules, too) what's left makes for a every nice representation of late 20th/early 21st century gang warfare. So we use it for that. Now, in theory, pre-gunpowder warfare would be a subset of the milieu, too. But the core of the rules is directed toward expecting certain types of interactions to be common, so I don't think just getting rid of firearms would make a good representation of a significantly earlier period. So it's kind of the opposite of "do you think we could extend these rules to add a bit?". So other than GMCO, Call of Cthulu (an RPG, not a wargame) without all the tentacles makes a nice noir mystery milieu (in fact, they tell you to throw a non-occult scenario in every now and then to keep the players off balance). I've also run D&D campaigns with "no magic" but kept things that could be considered cryptozoological rather than supernatural. Back to wargaming, I've found a couple WWII systems that you could remove the "military" capabilities and run an underground campaign. Also, MechWarrior without the 'mechs is a nice scifi force on force game. |
William Warner | 04 Oct 2020 9:51 a.m. PST |
|
Wolfhag | 04 Oct 2020 11:20 a.m. PST |
Couldn't Bolt Action or WH40K be converted to anything from sticks and stones to Cowboys and Aliens? Wolfhag |
Bashytubits | 04 Oct 2020 11:35 a.m. PST |
That is such a good idea Wolfhag I am going to do Bolt Action Cowboys vs Aliens. I loved that movie. |
Dukewilliam | 04 Oct 2020 12:05 p.m. PST |
The mechanics of (most) games are nothing more than manipulation of numbers to produce consistent (one hopes) results. No game ‘simulates' anything, ever. It's the armchair generals who don't want to admit that; they consider themselves tacticians. With this in mind, any game can be twisted to any conflict. In 5 minutes, I can turn ASL into a game about cave men fighting octopi. Not sure why it's hard for some folks to admit to playing with toy soldiers. It's not like we still make shooty noises, right. Well, sometimes, I guess. YMMV, Steve |
etotheipi | 04 Oct 2020 1:01 p.m. PST |
It's the armchair generals who don't want to admit that; they consider themselves tacticians. You may want to include all the actual military war colleges across the world that use tabletop wargaming to teach strategy and tactics to their actual generals. And the first responders, disaster relief organizations, etc. who do the same. any game can be twisted to any conflict. The key word being twisted. A Black and Decker circular saw can be used as a utensil to eat peas, too. Human beings have agency and tools to not, so you can use anything *(like a set of wargamer rules) for any purpose. That doesn't mean that it is good, or even adequate for that purpose. Couldn't Bolt Action or WH40K be converted to anything from sticks and stones to Cowboys and Aliens? So, to this point, sure. I'm not so sure how WH40K would be for implementing a sticks and stones fight. I did say that even though it is technically subsumed, GMCO isn't really a good set of rules for a pure pre-gunpowder milieu. Or a lot of others. |
Wolfhag | 04 Oct 2020 1:07 p.m. PST |
Bashy, Yes, that was an unexpendently good movie with a lot of potential for a game. I'm surprised that someone has not latched on to it. Six shooters, bowie knives, bows and arrows and laser blasting aliens to rescue the hottie damsel in distress. What's no not like? Wolfhag |
etotheipi | 04 Oct 2020 2:13 p.m. PST |
CvA also has the sweeping outdoor action leading to the dungeon crawl inside the ship. And even an urban town battle. Of sorts. We've played mini-campaigns based on CvA. The key piece is the VP for the first two scenarios need to influence the set up for the final dungeon crawl. While, technically, GMCO and WH40K have all the bits you need for those scenarios, I don't think either is structured for a good CVA. I've only played Bolt Action twice and watched once (while SEMBO was playing), so I'm not sure, but it might be a good platform. |
Dukewilliam | 04 Oct 2020 6:52 p.m. PST |
You may want to include all the military war colleges… Good point. From now on I will! Thanks for reminding me. Steve |
Extra Crispy | 04 Oct 2020 10:09 p.m. PST |
The Command and Colors/Memoir 44 system is easy, fun and you can adapt to to most any period in history with a few minor tweaks here and there. |
advocate | 05 Oct 2020 1:54 a.m. PST |
I tried to use Necromunda for WW2 section level skirmishes. I started by renaming most of the weapons (I think I had to drop one or two). I looked at the various skills and to my surprise didn't drop any. The campaign system didn't really port though. |
Rudysnelson | 05 Oct 2020 5:09 p.m. PST |
When we designed Guard du Corp back in 1981, we did a special supplement included in the box so the rules would play faster and be used for tournaments. Our Coastal Command PT Boat rules from 1984, had two main sections. A campaign section and a tactical rules section. The campaign rules were the main body for use with any set of PT Boat rules. During play testing, tabletop, players were asking for tactical rules that their rules lacked. So the appendix grew until only a few extra rules were needed for a compete tactical set. I also included extra information for most rules in later magazine articles. |
etotheipi | 08 Oct 2020 12:40 p.m. PST |
RudyNelson – I like that; it's "reverse scaffolding". Scaffolding is where you have a series of scenarios that start with basic play, then progressively introduce more and more concepts to the players. Most modern video games use this approach. Some wargames also have "quick play" or "intro rules" designed to teach basic concepts, but not really to represent the game. I like the idea of working it the other way. |
Rudysnelson | 11 Oct 2020 8:00 p.m. PST |
When we were doing rules mainly in the 1980s, we worked on concepts which are common now. For example with the Coastal Command rules, we created versions using blank maps, hex maps and even square map grids. With land based rules we worked with different ground scales. The Fire Ogon and Freur rules on WW2 for tanks. We did a 1:25 which was the most accurate for small models, 1:50 which was the most commonly used and 1:100 for small tables. |
zircher | 30 Dec 2021 10:18 a.m. PST |
I'm here due to the poll question inspired by this topic. I was particularly amused by the BattleTech example because I have done the combined arms thing with conventional units and air power. (Well, the BTech version of it.) I even went so far as to stat out something that resembled a A-10. I even called it the AC-10 since it was built around that gun. :-) |
pfmodel | 30 Dec 2021 1:01 p.m. PST |
SPI PRESTAGS ranges from chariots in 3000BC to gunpowder in 1499, which they achieve by having a complete core rules, or standard rules, and having a lot of special rules for all the specific periods they cover. If the core rules are robust and simple enough, they can, with special rules, apply to whatever you wish. |
UshCha | 02 Jan 2022 12:58 a.m. PST |
As has been said some basic mechanismes may be relatively flexable. The move/command and control sequence for Maneouvre Group had been used for Ships and Cowboys. and could be for cavemen, but for instance I would not use it directly for say a napolionic battloe. The dead ground rules are basic terrain so are suitable for any period. The danger in using sub sets is it becones to general. DBM Ancents to me failed not in command and control but by pasteing over too many periods, therby losing there distictiveness. Stripping rules could have this effect. Perhaps its a gamer vs simulator thing. |
pfmodel | 14 Jan 2022 12:13 a.m. PST |
The danger in using sub sets is it becones to general. This is true, basic building blocks can become boring, unless you play different scenario, but even then it does not have as much longevity. I noticed this with Lost battles, good set of rules but after playing a number of games the tactics becomes highly predicable. |
UshCha | 14 Jan 2022 2:14 a.m. PST |
pgmodel, is that real tactics or model tactis? We Maneouvre Group have worked tirelessly to make a game that encourages real world tactics as a fundamental objective. Highly predicatable would not be a word I would use for that model. Rommel and Monty had diffrent approches but both fall within the same real world model so should also fall within the same wargame model. Perhaps there are too few critical parameters in some of your games, a sin of over esimlified or poorly designed models. |
pfmodel | 14 Jan 2022 1:00 p.m. PST |
In my example, Lost battles, the objective is to simulate a historical ancient battle using 12 squares, similar to KISS Rommel. The game system simulates the battle very well but there is minimal manoeuvring and the significant decisions players can make minimal. It mainly revolves around moving your Commander around and deciding to attack or not to attack. After several games players work out the best decisions and just rinse and repeat, which then results in a historical game with some variability due to die rolls. This is a good simulation, but does not have a high degree of repeatability, so you move to the next scenario and repeat the process. After a dozen scenarios you begin to see common tactics which must always be implemented so even the new scenario path wears itself out. If we look at another simple game, SPI Modern Battles Wurzburg Scenario, there are a number of valid tactics for each side which are all equally valid. This game can be played over and over again, with each game having sufficient variability in it to be interesting. Other scenarios are not so good, so a lot depends on your scenarios, but there are other good scenarios such as Chinese farm. This is the impact of having a game system which restricts the number of significant decisions a player can make. The benefits are players can quickly have interesting games from the start, but the disadvantages are the games become repeatable, within the variability of luck. I must admit even in the real world we can get this repeatability, the German tactic of baiting British armour in the desert and then watch it destroy itself against an a/t screen becomes a bit tedious. This rarely occurs in war gaming, as the British players are aware of the trap, but it did in reality. |