Thoughts on Creating a “Group Build” of a 2nd Edition of Ambush Alley

[madman]

OK to explain the confusing title. I would like to see if people would like to work together to create a second edition of Ambush Alley. As part of seeig where I might be going with this see my previous questions posted here.

I have been playing Battlespace a lot recently as it really scratches my itch for a tense modern combat game. It has a lot of potential to cover alternate periods and even into sci fi or horror (zombies for example). However the entire game system is designed around the player(s) running a 4 man combat team. Yes there is a scenario where they run 2 but that is not the same as AA where you could run up to a platoon.

Other than not covering areas which I addressed with my questions I think Ambush Alley would be the best starting place for the gaming I want to play. What my games of AA seemed lacking in, and which Battlespace handled very well, are solo or cooperative play where the gamers play the regular forces only and the games seemed more close run affairs. As in there was more tension due to the insurgents being more numerous and effective.

So with that in mind and keeping in mind that the original designer has dropped out of writing any updates is there any interest in people working together to both update the game with respect to writing rules to cover areas or technologies not handled by the original game. Or creating better worded rules to cover missing or simplified mechanics which have been found lacking. At this time I have no interest in addressing Force on Force but rather the original Ambush Alley rules. As I said in my questions if FoF or one of it’s expansions or supplements covers or answers my issues then the rule from FoF would be used. I did look at FoF for answers to my questions in earlier question topics but didn’t find the answers before I started the topic. I did not go through every other FoF or AA book and there may have been an answer there I missed.

Now in my plays of AA I made it a point to shut down hot spots. This was the secondary goal for the group as a whole and the prime goal for most teams. I think the result changed how the games played but also felt both the presence of hot spots and the ability to shut them down were very valid and good game mechanics. Whether this obsession of mine unhinged the game system I doubt it but maybe. I would, however, not want to remove it from the game.

If people think I am out to lunch fine. If there are gamers out there who would like to discuss this concept as opposed to just a discussion of “house rules” that is fine as well. If you would rather keep things as is but maybe turn this thread into a clearing house for house rules that is fine as well.

[Papasan]

I was gutted to see that Shawn has dropped AA for other projects but it was not unexpected.
I saw this entry he put on FB a while back detailing the areas they were looking at which may, or may not, help you when creating your own version of AA2.

“First and foremost, we’ve stuck with our overriding game philosophies. The mechanics are still more interested in the outcome than the process. The quality of the soldier and his training is still more important than the kind of rifle he’s equipped with. Fog of War is still important and helps support the old adage that “the enemy gets a vote” in game play.
The AAG Engine will still feel like you’re playing AA, FoF, or TW.
We have made some changes, though:
* The turn sequence has been revamped and streamlined.
* The Reaction System has been revisited, simplified, and improved.
* The Morale system has been modified and a single die is now used for Morale Tests.
* The Vehicle Combat rules have been rewritten entirely to make them more streamlined and less time consuming on the table.
* Unit Attributes have been trimmed down, and many of them have been replaced by more generalized attributes like “Insurgent” or “SpecOps” that merge a number of related attributes into one.
The organization of the Osprey version of the book was confusing to many, so we’ve gone to great (and I mean GREAT) pains to improve the organization in this book. One element of that is the inclusion of FRAGOs at the beginning of each major rule section.
FRAGOs outline the key elements of a section in a stripped down, bullet point format. The text that follows provides more description and examples, but you could play the game using the FRAGOs alone.”

I’m pretty happy with where I’ve got to with FoF so far and  have a number of house rules already detailed in chats here that I’ve developed over the years but if I come up with anything new I’ll post them here.

 

[madman]

I really wish we could pick his brain for what he had in mind. Even as direction and not specifics. I think I went through every thread and made a file of alternate and house rules plus treated some threads and posts as FAQs.

I like the system but feel it could use some of the massaging along the lines he was mentioning. Anybody have his ear we can maybe see what he had in mind, or get some “half done” rules or revisions? I would have no issues helping bring these rules further along.

[Papasan]

That would be handy if we could get a steer,  I wonder how much of it is now in his new venture ?

[chairborne]

I think a ‘Group build’ idea is an excellent one. There is precedent in games like Net Epic. If Shawn was willing to provide his blessing and some insights as mentioned above that would go a long way.

[madman]

I am with Papasan in that it would be great to get input from the designer. I think it has been too long that they have been silent to expect they will be redoing it. I am busy with my mother who is going into long term care so this month I have been dealing with her apartment and all her stuff. Give me until next month (provided the jury duty that has also been dropped on me) to get my head back in the correct space. Then I will happily work as a facilitator for this project.

[Author]

Posts