Forum Replies Created

Viewing 40 posts - 2,001 through 2,040 (of 2,147 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: My No End in Sight campaign setting #8698
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Just placed an order for Eureka Australians though I may end up doing a “25 years from now” thing as well. It’s funny, this game essentially is my introduction into modern gaming as well (though I suppose it could work for WW2 just fine as well)

    Peace-keepers operating in the ruins of the second American civil war, fighting for turf? (The losers are stuck with New Jersey).

     

    Looking forward to seeing what you come up with, particularly for vehicles.

     

    Even a 60×60 cm table should give you a decent gaming space. The biggest change will be that you set up “moments before contact” instead of the longer “move into position” phase you tend to get in most games.

    Just remember that the tanks are at point blank range, and you’ll be less upset when they blow up real fast πŸ™‚

    in reply to: No End in Sight. Game mechanics breakdown #8603
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Ivan Sorensen wrote:</div>
    And I absolutely hear you on 15mm. A full platoon of infantry, 3 APC’s, a tank or two and it’s still in the 50-60 dollar range if you plan things right

    Hah, I thought you might have something to say about that πŸ™‚

    Don’t worry, there’ll be scifi down the road as well πŸ˜‰

    in reply to: No End in Sight. Game mechanics breakdown #8599
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    I just got my Eureka figures in the mail so figured I’d put in my couple of Danish kroner:

    I have modern figures from Peter Pig, Khurasan, QRF and Eureka at this point.

    Khurasan is the largest of the bunch, though they look decent mixed with QRF and PP (both of which seemΒ  very close to each other in size).

    The Eureka fig’s are wonderful when seen “in real life” BUT they are about a head shorter. Putting a crouching Khurasan russian next to a standing Eureka one and they’re the same size.

     

    That’s not good or bad on either side, some people prefer their 15’s bigger or smaller but it IS worth noting. If they were in opposing forces, I doubt anyone would notice. I’ve seen Rebel scifi figures and they seem about comparable with the Eureka guys.

     

    And I absolutely hear you on 15mm. A full platoon of infantry, 3 APC’s, a tank or two and it’s still in the 50-60 dollar range if you plan things right.

    in reply to: No End in Sight. Game mechanics breakdown #8562
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Peter Pig are a tiny bit smaller than QRF from my experience but it’s not terribly noticeable and on a gaming table (particular in opposing forces) no one would notice at all.

    There’s African irregulars in the Command Decision range too but I don’t know if they are any good or not.

     

    It seems at a casual glance, that vehicles are better supported in 15mm, but maybe I just haven’t looked in the right places.

    in reply to: No End in Sight. Game mechanics breakdown #8520
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Our last game was Armies Army “Rusk” versus WW2 German “insurgents” πŸ™‚

     

    edit: Second to last. Last was west germans vs soviets.

    Now, if Geoff from QRF would get on some East Germans πŸ™‚

     

    Been tempted to get some Australian modern figures from Eureka as near-future troopers. The Steyr assault rifles look nice and futuristic.

    in reply to: No End in Sight. Game mechanics breakdown #8518
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Look forward to seeing what you come up with! Let me know if you have any questions.

    in reply to: No End in Sight. Game mechanics breakdown #8387
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Thank you for your purchase πŸ™‚ I hope the game works great for you and holler if there’s anything you’re confused about.

    in reply to: No End in Sight. Game mechanics breakdown #8348
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Thanks for the reply – temptation rising, and the fact it has solo and campaign rules means I will find it hard to resist much longer

     

    It has a LOT of campaign rules πŸ˜‰

    If it helps tempt you further, there’ll be a hard scifi option in the future too, though I can’t honestly say when. A few months out probably.

    in reply to: No End in Sight. Game mechanics breakdown #8344
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Again, thanks for posting the information here and the other thread. some questions: With the movement described, is the game played in a small playing area?I am guessing that a Squad is easily played and you don’t need a whole platoon? I play a bit of Vietnam games using just a six man LRRP team vs VC/NVA, so wouldn’t need that many leaders on the board. Having said that, a LRRP team has a Team Leader, and an Assitant Team Leader. Would the rules allow me to use either of them to get activation points? Or is the Squad/Section Leader the only one at that level that can give orders as it were? Hiding and Spotting: are there any rules to cover this? LRRP teams like to hide, and it is important to some of the scenarios I play, so I am hoping there is something in the rules to cover this. Those are the only questions I have at the moment. The more I learn about the rules the more I like the sounds of them, especially as the activation system would work perfectly for solo games too.

     

    Play area: Yeah, it’s intended for a play area between 2×2 and 3×3 feet. So movement ranges are kind of short because you’re darting from cover to cover.

    You don’t need a platoon if you break down the elements a bit. If you have one squad, treat them as two separate entities. There’s some notes on that, but basically the team leader can act as a leader just fine, if that’s how you set up the scenario.

    The squad leader would then be the “platoon leader” role, being able to activate men from both teams.

     

    Sadly, no stealth and hiding. I’ll try to put something together and put it online as a freebie. The main focus as it stands now is when the two formations are at close quarters and the fire fight has begun.

    That being said, it wouldn’t be dreadfully hard to improvise.

     

    Kyote – I’ll do a bit about vehicles tomorrow. For now, vehicles are pretty generic (from the perspective of an infantry commander, a tank is a tank). You have traits you can apply to differentiate them a bit though.

    Vehicles function as a squad in their own right, with combat being quite deadly. After all, on a typical gaming table, your tanks are maybe 200 meters apart at best. Point blank even for a T55.

    in reply to: No End in Sight is released! #8223
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Okay, so the basic breakdown of the game, mechanically:

    The game is driven by leaders (squad or platoon).

    When it’s your turn to go, pick one of your leaders and roll 1D6. That’s how many activation points you get. Typically, 1 point activates 1 soldier under that guys command to move and fire or rallies a pinned figure.

    You can spend points on a few other things (launching RPG’s, getting marksmen into position, taking control of soldiers not in your squad etc)

    After each activation, the leader has a point of Stress added. (with dice, markers or similar).

     

    Next time it’s your turn, you can activate any leader you want, including ones that already acted. However, their stress is deducted from the activation rolls, giving you less AP the more you push the same leader.

    If a leader rolls no activation points, he becomes exhausted and cannot activate again.

     

    When all leaders are exhausted (by dice or voluntarily), the phase ends, you assess whether either side has won yet. If not, remove three stress from each leader (Any left over becomes permament), then begin a new phase.

     

    That’s the basic turn sequence.Β  I’ll touch on the firing mechanics later this afternoon.

    in reply to: 15mm modern african buildings for AK47 #8222
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Gamecraft miniatures have a ton of stuff in MDF and foamboard, including middle east styled compounds and whatnot.

    in reply to: No End in Sight is released! #8160
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Maybe Paul can give his thoughts?

    If you want, I can give a quick overview of the basic mechanics tomorrow. Obviously, for an unbiased opinion, you’ll have to get it from someone other than myself πŸ™‚

    in reply to: No End in Sight is released! #8155
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    From playtest request to finished product in just over a month. Will have to pick it up tonight, because I really enjoyed the play test games.

     

    Not wasting any time πŸ™‚

    Though it was cheating a little bit, since I had done some private testing before the public request. But you can’t tell if it’s going to be good or not until you’ve had other people poke their hands all over your rules. πŸ™‚

    in reply to: Quaker is Five Parsecs From Home #8121
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Looking good. Been daydreaming about doing this myself since I saw Spacejacker’s layout. Can’t decide whether to go 15mm or upscale the concept to 28mm. I even considered 6mm! Still deciding on whether to go Five Parsecs or not (sorry Ivan!) :)

    No worries πŸ™‚

    Any questions or concerns holding you back or just the usual gamer situation of too many games, too little time? πŸ™‚

    in reply to: Can we talk SF "infantry" weapons? #8120
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Wouldn’t one option be to look at more flexibility in weapons?

    If the basic infantry weapon incorporates long range targeting, an option for very high rate of fire and a “smart” grenade launcher attachment, the need for a wide range of support weapons might drop away.

    Along with every trooper having the ability to designate targets for drone mounted artillery in support a few kilometer behind him, and we have a pretty flexible “space marine” type.

    in reply to: Want to help test some rules? #8055
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Someones gotta go in front. Might as well be a volunteer πŸ˜‰

    in reply to: Want to help test some rules? #7921
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    USPS isn’t the fastest in the world. If UPS sorts their stuff out in the end you might end up getting two packages πŸ™‚

    in reply to: Bias in gaming rules? #7918
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Maybe it ties into the general question of “historical ratings”. Were say, Russians better or worse soldiers man for man than Austrians or did they get deployed better or had better dice rolls? That sort of things.

    Much as I love the game, I’d say Crossfire gets a little too pro-German.

    in reply to: Want to help test some rules? #7917
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    This is the table of contents:

     
    Introduction
    Turn Sequence
    Movement
    Engaging Hostiles
    Morale and Casualties
    The Last Few Yards
    Optional uses for Activation Points
    Buildings
    Vehicles
    Special Troop Types
    Special Rules
    Air Assault
    Solo Gaming
    Scenario Generator
    Campaign rules
    Personalities
    Crash Course in Organization
    Vehicle Classifications
    Conflicts and Scenarios
    Building Tiny Armies
    Designer Notes
    Quick reference

    in reply to: Quaker is Five Parsecs From Home #7915
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Sounds nice. You might want to make the Bail distance a bit smaller. D6+6″ instead of 12″ will avoid guys fleeing out of the starport πŸ™‚

    in reply to: Five Men in Normandy sale #7914
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    I’ll see if I can do another one by the end of the month.

    in reply to: Quaker is Five Parsecs From Home #7868
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Thanks for buying πŸ™‚

    I’ve been really tempted to build a terrain set like this myself. I think you strike a good balance between having enough rooms to make it interesting and still having good space to reach in and move the figures.

     

    A LOT of people are doing this in 15mm, which warms my heart πŸ™‚ How big is your board when it’s all set up?

    in reply to: Bias in gaming rules? #7818
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Judging from the stats given in a lot of WW2 games, you’d be surprised to learn that the Germans lost and the allies won πŸ˜‰

    in reply to: Want to help test some rules? #7808
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    73? I’m far from being born yet, future mom is probably on social assistance and my future dad is either a hippie, in jail or both, depending on the week.

    On the upside, the music is getting good.

    in reply to: Want to help test some rules? #7800
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Everything goes wrong. Nuclear missiles dont hit their targets, chain of command is FUBAR and due to the EMP bursts, nobody can get proper orders. So the war comes down to a few battalion commanders slugging it out somewhere in Germany until the higher ups can sort things out πŸ™‚

    in reply to: Want to help test some rules? #7668
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    The QRF ones are quite good. The basic infantry pack also includes an RPG and a pair of machine gunners along with 5 riflemen. Only thing lacking is some sort of leader looking guy.

    I like to have a figure that’s waving, pointing or otherwise standing out a bit. Makes it easier to pick out who’s in charge.

    in reply to: Want to help test some rules? #7663
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    It’ll have the chance to go in every which direction. Maybe the whole thing stays as a border skirmish in Germany and maybe it ends up with gas and radiation.

    I have soviets from QRF which are nice and am waiting for a batch from Khurasan to have some more variety in poses. I have some old ones from Battle Honours or some such, but they’re not very good sculpts.

    in reply to: Want to help test some rules? #7659
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Coming up third: The Escalation campaign.

    When border incidents turn hot between NATO and the Warsaw Pact, it’s going to be a bumpy ride. This is probably the most grim of the campaigns provided for:

    After each encounter, you roll to determine if the overall war effort escalates or if calmer heads are winning out. Fight and hopefully survive on the European battlefields while hoping that you don’t see the telltale glare of rockets in the sky.

    in reply to: [Syndicate] Trench coat cyberpunk agents? #7656
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Yeah they are nice. I just bought some to play Five Parsecs From Home with ;)

     

    Nice! πŸ™‚ They’d make good Unity agents or generic “evil corporate henchmen”. With those haircuts, could probably be good gang material too, actually.

    in reply to: [Syndicate] Trench coat cyberpunk agents? #7653
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Wish they had goggles but those are pretty good.

     

    in reply to: Five Men in Normandy sale #7639
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    I mailed it again but USPS today. So hopefully all should be good in a few days, give and take πŸ™‚

    in reply to: Roguelikes? #7622
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Just got sucked into playing “Sword of the Stars: The Pit”. Very nice scifi dungeon crawler with a cool skill system, quite a few characters and a really catchy soundtrack. There’s a demo too and it’s available on Mac and Linux too.

    in reply to: Rules recommendation…. #7620
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    WW1 games tend to not like 1 squad = 1 stand for some reason. My old Trench Storm rules were in that scale but they’re impossible to find now. It was mostly a WW1 version of GW’s old Space Marine, with some tweaks added.

     

    Crossfire will work fine, though honestly Crossfire always just feels like Crossfire. I’ve played it WW1, RCW, WW2 and moderns and it never felt any different.

    “Through the mud and the blood” is man to man but it IS excellent and captures the period pretty well.

    in reply to: My sci fi buildings #7611
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    That is super nice looking. Looks like a fun table to play on too.

    in reply to: Charity #7572
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    I think this is a very nice gesture.

    The exact charity doesn’t matter too much to me as long as it goes to a good cause. If you do this again, you could always rotate them out.

    in reply to: When Does SciFi Start ?? #7571
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    This is a really good question actually.

    I’ve started to view it more as “imaginary” gaming. We’ve begun playing some “20 years from now” scenarios. They’re essentially present-day games in technology but with made-up conflicts and in some cases near-future miniatures.

    Someone suggested that it’s whenever you add a “space” element. Aliens invade in 1950? It’s a scifi game. Maybe we should go back to the old literary term of speculative fiction?

    I think some of the problem with the term is that as gamers we’re concerned with the gadgetry and aliens, while “science fiction” at least nominally revolves around changing some aspect of reality and then examining the world that it creates.

    in reply to: Five Men in Normandy sale #7570
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Alright, Sales over. Quite a few took advantage so thank you and happy gaming!

    in reply to: Want to help test some rules? #7491
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    I sent the PDF to you. I think the basic principles won’t be too hard to explain. It’s all fairly straight forward stuff.

    With that said, you’ll be the last of the playtesters πŸ™‚

     

    in reply to: Want to help test some rules? #7423
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    The second campaign style is “Domino Theory”.

    This is a bit more involved but basically after each game, you roll for a neighbouring country to see how they are responding to things. It’s intended for any campaign where one ideology is being contained, whether communism, fundamentalist religion or any other idea.

     

    Success in battles will improve the chances of bolstering the defenses of various countries against the ideology.

    in reply to: Want to help test some rules? #7314
    Avatar photoIvan Sorensen
    Participant

    Two campaign styles are finished.

    The general campaign rules gives you the basics: Some chances to upgrade men and leaders, replacing casualties and whatnot.

    You get a general “military operations” system where you set up a number of objectives in the region you are fighting in.
    As you win battles, you can chip away at those objectives until they’re overcome.

    The second campaign is the “hearts and minds”, suitable for Iraq, some Vietnam games, Afghanistan (coalition and communist) and many more.

    Here, you are trying to increase the Stability of the region. With each battle, stability may go up and down, which will affect rolls on the hearts&minds table. The enemy may gain or lose strength and ultimately, the region will either become pacified or be ruled uncontrollable.

    So if you fancy seeing how well your platoon will do pacifying a particularly unruly province in Afghanistan, this is for you.

    I’ll share more about the next campaign styles tomorrow if all goes well.Two campaign styles are finished.

    The general campaign rules gives you the basics: Some chances to upgrade men and leaders, replacing casualties and whatnot.

    You get a general “military operations” system where you set up a number of objectives in the region you are fighting in.
    As you win battles, you can chip away at those objectives until they’re overcome.

    The second campaign is the “hearts and minds”, suitable for Iraq, some Vietnam games, Afghanistan (coalition and communist) and many more.

    Here, you are trying to increase the Stability of the region. With each battle, stability may go up and down, which will affect rolls on the hearts&minds table. The enemy may gain or lose strength and ultimately, the region will either become pacified or be ruled uncontrollable.

    So if you fancy seeing how well your platoon will do pacifying a particularly unruly province in Afghanistan, this is for you.

    I’ll share more about the next campaign styles tomorrow if all goes well.

Viewing 40 posts - 2,001 through 2,040 (of 2,147 total)