# The Gaming Den

Welcome to the Gaming Den.

Skip to content

## "Tactical" Games, and turn sequence

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply

- Print view

6 posts • Page 1 of 1

Judging__Eagle
  Prince
  Posts: 4671
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: Lake Ontario is in my backyard; Canada

### "Tactical" Games, and turn sequence

- Quote

Post by Judging__Eagle » Wed Aug 26, 2009 1:30 pm

Something that's always bothered me about WH 40k is "player turns"
I've actually preffered stuff like the BattleTech system of "Phases" Movement, Firing, Assault.
I think that Changing the Turns of 40k, into Phases, where players roll off; with the person winning deciding to go first, or last in each phase; is a much better system.
Partly because it would save time, it's easier to have both players move their units at roughly the same time, than it is for one person to move all of their people, and the other person have to wait for several minutes before they can do so themselves.
Assaults would also be resolved faster; one person would assault the other first, or they would both charge against each other at the same time; a much more realistic simulation than the current "Hurr, Hurr, Hurr, we charge you nao!" bullshit where you can't actually counter a charge, by charging yourself.
Also, it would make the mvoement phase a fuck ton more dynamic and believable.
I'd suggest that shooting be done as a "simultaneous" sort of deal; with perhaps the Initative stat for units make more of a difference.
Assaulting would be pretty much the same thing, simultaneous. Units that are going to engage in melee, will charge each other immediately.
Units that decided to shoot instead with stuff like "rapid fire" weapons obviously can't assault, since that's what the rules for those kinds of weapons are, but players would always be able to fire or not fire said rounds.
So, for the most part, units would have to decide to either shoot, or assault. Based on their weapons.
Right now, nearly every stat gets used a lot, except for Init, which is purely to determine 'speed' of HtH attack delivery.
The Gaming Den; where Mathematics are rigorously applied to Mythology.
While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
Top

Murtak
  Duke
  Posts: 1577
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Murtak » Wed Aug 26, 2009 1:45 pm

Confrontation, the only tactical mini game I play, has players alternate moving a single unit. Hand to hand combat is the same, with no model making more than one attack before the other model has a chance to strike back. Initiative determines who strikes first in melee and another stat called discipline determines who moves first (or last, player's choice). It works pretty well and you actually get preemptive and counter-charges, although at the unit and single model levels you never have models charging one another.
As to your idea - how would two units charging each other look like? I can't understand how you can work that out without computer assistance.
Murtak
Top

Judging__Eagle
  Prince
  Posts: 4671
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: Lake Ontario is in my backyard; Canada

###

- Quote

Post by Judging__Eagle » Wed Aug 26, 2009 3:53 pm

Well, what I'm thinking is that players would declare if each squad will shoot, or assault in the "combat phase".
Players will probably alternate, declaring which squad will move, moving them; and then in the "combat phase" declaring if a squad will assault, or not.
If a squad is declared that it will assault an other squad, then the targeted squad has to choose between assaulting in return, or sitting put and fire at the assaulting squad.
Squads don't actually shoot until the end of the phase, or they are able to shoot upon squads that are moving to assault them.
If they kill enough models that are charging them such that the assault can no longer reach them, then the assaulting squad fails to assault this round. but is now stuck out in the open.
Right now, 40k doesn't represent realistic battles at all; movement should try to be in real-time as much as possible; the same with shooting and assault.
The Gaming Den; where Mathematics are rigorously applied to Mythology.
While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
Top

MartinHarper
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 703
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by MartinHarper » Wed Aug 26, 2009 3:55 pm

I liked the 40k epic system (back when I played). The phases were (roughly):
First Fire
Move
Advance Fire
Combat
In each phase, rather than being simultaneous, players alternated. Units could either shoot in the First Fire phase, or move in the Move phase and shoot in the Advance Fire phase. Combat was done simultaneously.
Top

mean_liar
  Duke
  Posts: 2187
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: Boston

###

- Quote

Post by mean_liar » Wed Aug 26, 2009 4:13 pm

WH40k will never represent "realistic battles", so you might want to give up on that.
If it's too trifling then I suggest looking for real war games - they're MUCH more satisfying. Or just play Epic.
Top

Judging__Eagle
  Prince
  Posts: 4671
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: Lake Ontario is in my backyard; Canada

###

- Quote

Post by Judging__Eagle » Wed Aug 26, 2009 5:11 pm

I'm looking for a really good sci-fi tactical set of rules then. I like playing 40k, but what really, what I want to do is play Dawn of War, in table-top format.
Since it's a fuck-ton better than actual 40k is.
The Gaming Den; where Mathematics are rigorously applied to Mythology.
While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
Top
Post Reply

- Print view

Display:
Sort by:
Direction:

6 posts • Page 1 of 1

Return to “In My Humble Opinion...”

Jump to

- Main
- ↳ About the Gaming Den
- ↳ In My Humble Opinion...
- ↳ I Gave the Mouse a Cookie...
- ↳ In The Trenches
- ↳ It's My Own Invention...
- ↳ MPSIMS