Skip to Content
 

A change in taking cover

11 replies [Last post]
Mon, 10/06/2014 - 05:22
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013

My game greatly depends on having a front line to take the bullets, and a support line to work from the shadows.

Infantry taking cover behind some sand bags could easily deal with retarded tanks who think that have a chance. But these tanks in their turn could easily take cover behind some infantry as well.

It was already clear for a long time that a tank cannot hide behind a little wooden fence or infantry unit.

At this moment, my game works in such a way. That one wooden fence of €30 (size=30) can protect an entire battalion of tanks worth of 5 x €600 (size=5x600)
This little wooden fence is capable of stopping 3 cannon shots.
To make matters worse, there is still plenty of room in that region for a total of 20 wooden fences. Meaning, 60 cannon shots can be stopped before a tank can get hit.

It makes no sense to any one of us, right?

I want to change that. But without loosing the fact that there is a meat and support line.

In most RTS games, when you tear down a wall. What ever is behind that wall, is now attackable by all the weapons that are in line of sight to that target.
On a board game however, this is hardly possible if you have 2 squads fighting each other. Especially when the squad is customized in positions each battle. For that, the game in question is too complex to change.

***

One way to approach this problem in a new way, is to force players to have an equal amount in size or more as meat before the support line is protected. This means that one tank of 600, needs at least 20 wooden fences standing for taking cover. If the amount of wooden fences drops to 19. The tank is now a possible target.

For 2 tanks, we need 40 wooden fences.
For 3 tanks, we need 60 wooden fences.
If we have 3 tanks while only 59 wooden fences. Than one tank can be targeted.

In addition:
- Should I allow players to target any tank until one tank dies?
or
- Should I force the tank player to put one tank in the front line as primary and only target?
or
- Should I allow the tank player to put all the tanks in the support line. But simply saying, which tanks take cover behind the wooden fence each round? Meaning, an indirect cover is possible.

(I should reduce the amount of FLANK, FOCUS and BACK-DOOR cards)

Even though, it is an huge improvement either way. What else can I consider regarding taking cover?

Top
Wed, 10/08/2014 - 11:25
#1
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
These are the questions actually

General situation:
Too much tanks taking cover behind the Wooden Fences.

- Should I allow players to target any tank until one tank dies? Thus, first tank A, then tank B, then tank C. Then going for the kill on tank A. Leaving 2 severaly damaged tanks behind the wooden fences.
or
- Should I force the tank player to put one tank in the front line as primary and only target? Thus the tank player protects tank B and C, yet A gets executed if the damage is sufficiënt.
or
- Should I allow the tank player to put all the tanks in the support line. But simply saying, which tanks take cover behind the wooden fence each round? Meaning, an indirect cover is possible. This is an option if the tank player has 2 different type of tanks.

Even though, it is an huge improvement either way. What else can I consider regarding taking cover?

Top
Wed, 10/08/2014 - 11:39
#2
mulletsquirrel
mulletsquirrel's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/14/2014
Assuming each tank requires

Assuming each tank requires 20 fences to shield it fully, if you have 3 tanks and 59 fences, I think that two tanks would be fully defended and the other tank would not be totally covered. This tank would be the only one partially "targetable".

But what happens if there are only 58 fences? Maybe there is one fence missing from two tanks, or two fences missing from one tank. How do you know?

What if there are 57 fences? Are all 3 tanks targetable? Only one or two?

Maybe in these scenarios, a random tank could be hit if multiple tanks are using the same group of fences.

P.S. Why are tanks hiding behind wooden fences?

Top
Wed, 10/08/2014 - 12:17
#3
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Quote: P.S. Why are tanks

Quote:

P.S. Why are tanks hiding behind wooden fences?

Because you can't see them behind wooden fences. :)

I know, I know, it doesn't make much sense. That is why I am adjusting this "cover" a bit to more reality.
In the original game, we had like 35 soldiers, hiding behind 1. Yes, that is right, 1, wooden fence.
I rather change that.

It isn't like a simple wooden fence, but rather;
Wooden Fence:
http://rtw.heavengames.com/albums/album36/WAL_wood_b.jpg
But think; "more advanced" too. A "wooden" wall that could be placed in modern warfare.

A wall (or other none moving units like structures) has 2 purposes:
1 - Stopping incoming fire, thus units can hide behind their own walls. [As a special rule, enemies can abuse your own placed walls. But the owner of the walls has the primary choice.]
2 - Stopping or slowing down movement. If an region is filled with 50% objects like walls. Than there is only 50% room for other units to stand in or pass through. A player can fill up a certain base entrance, "you shall not pass!". But the room reduction is for all players, including the owner.

Currently, I have 3 type of walls. Light, Medium and Heavy:
- The light one (Wooden Fence) can be used amass, it's strenght lies within being fodder. It mainly stops grenades and cannon fire. 120 can be placed, each worth 30.
- The medium one (Sand Bags) acts like fodder against cannons, but is durable against bullets. However, grenades can blow them appart. 40 can be placed, each worth 90.
- The heavy one (Concrete Wall) can take a lot of bullets and grenade fire. It is very durable. 20 can be placed, each worth 180.

Walls can not move (duh.) But are very cheap primary defences. It is very very rare to use them in an attack.
And if you use multiple wooden fences, you stack them to make a bigger wooden wall.

Top
Thu, 10/09/2014 - 13:22
#4
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
A decision has been made

Comments or critisism is always possible.
However, the rules regarding cover have been changed.

After testing the 3 ways. I have come to a conclusion. And it has given more strategic options for the players as well.

I have choosen:

Quote:

When a player attacks or is attacked. It sets up the meat and support lines. The rule in this is that the cover for a support has to be equal or bigger in size. During the battle, no position can be changed. The player has to wait for another round.

That what cannot take cover, will remain in the open for that round.
Example: Tank A is in the open. Meaning; if another tank (tank B) that does take cover. Is targeted with the help of an Event Card, Tank A cannot take the vacant place of the defeated Tank B during that battle.

Regarding range:
The basic Battle Tank (600 each), has a range of 2. This means that 2 of these tanks can take cover behind 20 Wooden Fences (600 total).
It works this way: One tank takes cover behind the wooden fences at range position 1.
The second tank takes cover behind the first tank, in position 2.
Both tanks are still allowed to fight.

Card effects from good to mediocre:
+++ A focus card can reach any tank or wall.
++ A flank card can reach any line except the first and last line.
+ A back door card can only reach the last tank. The set up is reversed.

When players have 3 tanks or more. They need enough to make cover for 2 tanks. If there is only enough cover for one tank. Then all the other tanks can form a single line. But only 2 tanks may fire that are in range. There is now a new choice for the players: Weak defence, strong attack. Or strong defence, weak attack.

This will be a H*ll lot of work to be explaining to new players. Maybe an advanced players manual???

Top
Thu, 10/09/2014 - 19:21
#5
Experimental Designs
Experimental Designs's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/20/2013
X3M wrote: This will be a

X3M wrote:

This will be a H*ll lot of work to be explaining to new players. Maybe an advanced players manual???

And just like that the magic is gone.

Why wooden fences? Why something so arbitrary like wooden fences? What about bushes, trees and bombed out buildings? Unless wooden fences is the only cover in the game then welcome to the great prairie wars.

Top
Fri, 10/10/2014 - 06:09
#6
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
One more time then

I used wooden fences as an example.
I have named more objects which only function as a wall.
And structures can serve as cover too.
Any unit can serve as cover too.
Forests and Big Rocks serve as random cover, which cannot be removed from the map.
Height serves as random cover too.

The game is expandable, more walls and structures and units will be added in the future.

Quote:

And just like that the magic is gone.

Please explain.

Top
Fri, 10/10/2014 - 21:28
#7
Experimental Designs
Experimental Designs's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/20/2013
What I meant by that was

What I meant by that was you're taking something simple and making it more complex than needed.

With such a huge understanding of math this should be code for software instead of boardgames. Your talent here is akin to using a 20 pound sledge hammer to kill an ant.

Top
Sat, 10/11/2014 - 04:55
#8
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
I get ya. You think the game

I get ya. You think the game will be to hard for players. Perhaps you are right. So far though, no complaints from my play testers.
Could it be that this is due to them knowing every little detail of every unit?
They already know the sizes of each unit well enough to get through terrain.

***

In the beginning of the manual is said that any thing placed on the board; mines, walls, structures, soldiers etc. All are known as units, and treated as units.

The rule regarding taking cover, basic play:

Quote:

For an unit or a group of units to be able to take cover; they need an unit or a group of units, right in front of them.

That is the old rule. And allows any unit to take cover behind any other unit. That big nasty Rocket Launcher lives twice as long when making use of one wooden fence.

The rule regarding taking cover, advanced play:

Quote:

For an unit or a group of units to be able to take cover; they need an unit or a group of units, equal or bigger in total size, right in front of them.

That big nasty Rocket Launcher now needs at least 40 wooden fences combined.

I also included 3 examples for explaining BOTH rules.
One with a Rifle Infantry, taking cover behind several amounts of wooden fences.
But also the example with the tanks and concrete walls.
Plus a complete squad of all kinds of units combined.

Of course, if you know of a way of a better formulation of the rule.
or
If you know of a better name for wooden fence.
Please let me know.

Top
Sat, 10/11/2014 - 09:17
#9
mulletsquirrel
mulletsquirrel's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/14/2014
It seems like your game will

It seems like your game will only contain a few units and hundreds of fences!

Top
Sat, 10/11/2014 - 10:18
#10
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
Each unit has a limit in

Each unit has a limit in number.
120 in case of wooden fences.
But there are not 120 cards, only a maximum of 18 (+2 reserve).
Having 120 of them in one place requires only 1 wooden fence, with a counter going with it. The counter goes from 1 to (120) a lot.

Top
Mon, 10/27/2014 - 09:32
#11
X3M
X3M's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/28/2013
The 4 Grenadiers

This issue has not been resolved completely yet. Too much off topic has been discussed.

While it is clear that the meat in size has to be bigger or equal to the support line, for protecting any thing in the support line.

It is still a question what to target when sufficient meat has been brought down.

For this example, I give 4 Grenadiers.
When a Grenadier is hurt in one round, it will take cover behind another Grenadier in the next round.

However, we only have the meat and "1" support line possible with Grenadiers. This means that if 3 Grenadiers are hurt, only 1 can take cover behind the Grenadier with full health. Clearly, the attacker can attack 2 weakened Grenadiers if he/she wants to.
However, when only 2 are hurt, both are hiding behind 2 full health Grenadiers. What if one of the front Grenadiers dies, and there is sufficient damage to attack the support line.

Does this mean that the attacker can choose a target?
Or does this mean that the defender can choose the next victim?

To make it clear why this is important:
If the squads health is 3+3+2+1, then the front line has 3+3 and the support line has 2+1.
The attacker has 4 hits. Meaning a full health Grenadier dies. The squads health is now 3 and 2+1. If during this battle, the attacker has 1 more damage to inflict. Which one to hurt?

If the attacker has a choice, it means the new squad becomes 3 and 2 = 2 Grenadiers.

If the defender has a choice, it means the new squad becomes 3 and 1+1 = 3 Grenadiers (is +50% more attack power the next round).

We play tested both possibilities. But for now, there is still no clear choice of what would be the most fun.

Logical speaking, the projectiles are already flying. Thus both possibilities are weird to choose.

Top
Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut