Just a quick update: today I finally had my first test game of Full Thrust, using the "lite" version, which uses a simpler movement system and only features lasers and energy torpedoes. I made some very simple starship counters and a turning tool to help maneuvering.
Surprisingly, the game worked pretty well on a 90cm x 60cm table, even measuring ranges in inches. Granted, there were only three ships on each side (two light cruisers and one heavy cruiser.) This made maneuvering very important and combat quite deadly, as the ships were often close and thus able to fire all weapons at top power.
I will leave a "first impressions" to another time, after I have played the full rules. So far, I can see why this game remains popular among those who like space combat games.
Friday, April 24, 2015
Wednesday, April 22, 2015
First impressions: Rogue Planet
I picked this up as the "deal of the day" on WargameVault, after reading Brent Spivey's interesting suggestions for solo play in the discussion section of the product page.
Since the book is only 24 pages long, I decided to run some quick tests. I started trying to make a zombies vs. extermination team game. Since there is no way to model units with slower movement (I wanted "classic" slow zombies) they became infected mutants. My two teams were:
4x Infected Mutants (46 points each)
CQ 5 / RAT 2 / DEF 3 / ARM [Group]
Claws & teeth (melee, +1 vs. [Light])
Infected Leader (57 points)
CQ 4 / RAT 5 / DEF 6 / ARM [Light]
Claws & teeth (melee, +1 vs. [Light])
Pulse rifle (+1 vs. [Light])
4x Exterminator (41 points each)
CQ 3 / RAT 5 / DEF 4 / ARM [Light]
Infantry rifle (+1 vs. [Light])
Squad leader (68 points)
CQ 4 / RAT 6 / DEF 5 / ARM [Light]
Infantry rifle (+1 vs. [Light])
Grenade
Movement actions have unlimited range in a straight line, unless you contact a terrain piece or other unit. I cannot help comparing this to Song of Blades and heroes, although in this case, it is a little less fiddly (no movement sticks) and gives the game a more "cinematic" feel. On the other hand, as I mentioned before, I could not see any way to make slow-moving units (although it is possible to make faster ones.)
Since the book is only 24 pages long, I decided to run some quick tests. I started trying to make a zombies vs. extermination team game. Since there is no way to model units with slower movement (I wanted "classic" slow zombies) they became infected mutants. My two teams were:
4x Infected Mutants (46 points each)
CQ 5 / RAT 2 / DEF 3 / ARM [Group]
Claws & teeth (melee, +1 vs. [Light])
Infected Leader (57 points)
CQ 4 / RAT 5 / DEF 6 / ARM [Light]
Claws & teeth (melee, +1 vs. [Light])
Pulse rifle (+1 vs. [Light])
4x Exterminator (41 points each)
CQ 3 / RAT 5 / DEF 4 / ARM [Light]
Infantry rifle (+1 vs. [Light])
Squad leader (68 points)
CQ 4 / RAT 6 / DEF 5 / ARM [Light]
Infantry rifle (+1 vs. [Light])
Grenade
In the first test match I left out two groups of mutants and two exterminators, just to learn the rules. The game was over in about 30 minutes, and I just had to consult the quick reference sheet for damage effects and counter-actions.
In the second match, I used the entire forces, the battle lasted about the same. The exterminators won both times, although the first match was very close. Lesson learned: groups are very flexible for maneuvering but you should make them very good at either melee or ranged, because they die quite easily and do not provide energy for the team.
In the second match, I used the entire forces, the battle lasted about the same. The exterminators won both times, although the first match was very close. Lesson learned: groups are very flexible for maneuvering but you should make them very good at either melee or ranged, because they die quite easily and do not provide energy for the team.
Turn structure is IGO-UGO, but the opposing player might be able to interrupt any action. The game uses a random number of action points per turn, so not all units may be able to activate. Actions include moving (in a straight line, up to a terrain piece), attacking, charging, and using powers or magic. Counter-moves also require action points.
Movement actions have unlimited range in a straight line, unless you contact a terrain piece or other unit. I cannot help comparing this to Song of Blades and heroes, although in this case, it is a little less fiddly (no movement sticks) and gives the game a more "cinematic" feel. On the other hand, as I mentioned before, I could not see any way to make slow-moving units (although it is possible to make faster ones.)
Task resolution uses a unified mechanic, including melee and ranged attacks. In all cases, just one die roll is needed, thus keeping the game simple and easy to learn. Damage depends on armor type and there is a clever system that allows players to spend "energy" to save some units from defeat.
The rules for leader units and their pawns (sidekicks that grant bonuses or abilities to the leader) are very cool and, like the rest of the game, strike a balance between providing tactical choices and fostering narrative in the game.
Conclusion
My first impression of Rogue Planet is: a fast-playing game with many interesting ideas. The short stat line, simple resolution and no measurement are inviting for some "impromptu" playing -- like statting up a handful of toy soldiers and playing on the dinner table, using napkins and whatnot as terrain pieces.
It does have some limitations in modeling units but does not feel too abstracted. The way movement and shooting work makes it necessary to scatter enough terrain pieces to break long straight corridors across the board, although I do not think the board would have to be as closed as in, say, Infinity. One interesting thing is, for the same reasons, board size is not as important.
Given its features, I think I would use Rogue Planet for narrative-inspired games, maybe a series of 4-5 battles chained together forming a story arc. I am not sure I would use it for longer campaigns.
My first impression of Rogue Planet is: a fast-playing game with many interesting ideas. The short stat line, simple resolution and no measurement are inviting for some "impromptu" playing -- like statting up a handful of toy soldiers and playing on the dinner table, using napkins and whatnot as terrain pieces.
It does have some limitations in modeling units but does not feel too abstracted. The way movement and shooting work makes it necessary to scatter enough terrain pieces to break long straight corridors across the board, although I do not think the board would have to be as closed as in, say, Infinity. One interesting thing is, for the same reasons, board size is not as important.
Given its features, I think I would use Rogue Planet for narrative-inspired games, maybe a series of 4-5 battles chained together forming a story arc. I am not sure I would use it for longer campaigns.
Wednesday, April 15, 2015
Another fold-flat scenario test
Here is yet another test for fold-flat terrain, in this case dungeons or sci-fi bases. The wall segments are simple two-sided strips with a folded base to hold the floor piece. Walls are conected by triangular posts, with small paper clips (in this 15mm scale version).
This is what the pieces look when taken apart:
Multiple rooms can be connected simply by adding more posts and walls. The main problem is finding a better way to fix the floor. Currently, it is held between the triangular posts and the folded pieces of the walls, but this is not very stable.
One alternative might be to simply have a large floor tile and place the entire set of walls above it, instead of having separate floor pieces for each room.
This is what the pieces look when taken apart:
Multiple rooms can be connected simply by adding more posts and walls. The main problem is finding a better way to fix the floor. Currently, it is held between the triangular posts and the folded pieces of the walls, but this is not very stable.
One alternative might be to simply have a large floor tile and place the entire set of walls above it, instead of having separate floor pieces for each room.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)