Recommend
4 
 Thumb up
 Hide
17 Posts

Tactical GameX» Forums » General

Subject: This looks good. rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Sava Toufexis
United States
Conesus
United States
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I've printed it out and I'm about to get into it. The rules look great and are sound, IMO. I don't think this is a "successor" to PB/PL. Ithink think it's a huge improvement of a base system that is a solid platform.

Really nice work. Congratulations!


Soon, on to Arab Israeli Wars!!!
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
matt gonneau
United States
New York
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
+1

A superb rules graphic presentation - well done...

..now about Indirect Fire.. whistle
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Nagel
United States
Burlington
New Jersey
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks, guys!

Matt ... what about indirect fire?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
matt gonneau
United States
New York
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Just joshing! - seems like the way in which IF [but really I mean more non-armor attacks not just IF] is resolved in PB has always been one of the most common house-ruled aspects of the game. An off-thread point but here we go..

I'm still unresolved on the best way to distribute [or not] attack points among units defending in a hex. Some methods seem to confer a defensive advantage to stacked units by having the strength of a bombardment divided amongst the defending units - meaning a unit will fare better in a stack against a given attack than were it alone and facing the full bombardment.

Other systems call for each unit to defend against the full strength of the bombardment so as to pay a penalty for stacking. The classic is simply AS vs combined DF [simplified description].

I'm working on a method of dividing the final AS into thirds, then rolling for each 'triad' to see which 'stack slot' it hits. Each triad is guaranteed to hit something in a fully stacked hex, potentially all triads can hit the same unit but more likely the hits will be distributed amongst the defenders. But with fewer defending units there is an increased chance a triad hits an unoccupied 'stack slot'. A single unit in a hex would average one triad hit per attack [so a 1/3 AS attack]. Just an untested idea at this point.

I've printed up your rules and getting them spiral bound. Nice package.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Nagel
United States
Burlington
New Jersey
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Matt,

Yeah, I agree that IF resolution is a little weird. I'm trying to keep it as near as possible to the original process so as to not over- or under-value its use.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
matt gonneau
United States
New York
New York
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Mike,
I agree completely with the philosophy of sticking as close as possible to the original - that's the whole point of re-imagining PB/PL. The iconic quality [still!] of the boards, counters and simple rules beckon for these kinds of projects.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Koblinsky
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
The Woman Who Lives in the Sun by Kenojuak Ashevak
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
We're almost finished our first game. Indirect fire maybe seems a little illogical, but I think it does its job.

Another alternative we've been thinking of is that the attack is always divided by four (the stacking limit) instead of the number of units in the hex, but you get as many attacks/rolls as units in the hex. 4 for 4, or 1 for 1 etc... And, most importantly, a unit can be attacked more than once.

As an example from our game: a Wespe and Hummel attacking indirectly have a combined AS of 100 divided by 2, or 50. This is then divided by four to get 12. A hex with 1 T-34 (and therefore one attack against it) has a fifty percent chance of being disrupted: AS 12 vs DS 9. If 2 T-34s are in the same hex, you can roll to try and disrupt both units, or once one is disrupted you can roll again against that already disrupted unit. You will then have a 33% (actually better than that because of the -1 drm) of eliminating it.

This is maybe more consistent with dividing the AS. Instead of by units, it's by "area" and possible "slots".

It does not reward stacking several units, and doesn't punish single unit stacks.

I don't know if this over-values, under-values, or maintains the original strengths of the units.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Nagel
United States
Burlington
New Jersey
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Steven,

I really can't speak for original intent, but I can guess that the idea behind the IF rules has to do with concentration vs the scale of the game. Concentration vs two units in a hex would be double the concentration vs four units in the hex. So using stacking as a quotient would make IF that much less accurate, which could be disputed (there are people watching where the ranging shots land).

Like, I said ... a guess.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steven Koblinsky
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
The Woman Who Lives in the Sun by Kenojuak Ashevak
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Makes sense. And I think this highlights why this rule set is good; you're altering the original rules a little, but keeping the original intentions, as far as you can guess them, in mind.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charles Neal
Canada
Nepean
Ontario
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
I'm impressed with the layout of the rule book. It seems to flow in a logical fashion. So does the game. The book has been printed out and I hope to try a game soon (if real life doesn't interfere too much!)

What has the experience been with the multitude of markers being used? Does it slow the game down appreciably? I can picture that once players are used to using the markers that it would be part of the rhythm of the game.

Oh yeah, one more thing: Mike, is the game supposed to be pronounced 'Tactical Game Ex' or 'Tactical Game Ten'?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Nagel
United States
Burlington
New Jersey
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Charles,

I don't find the game to be slow at all. The impulse system keeps things snappy.

In re pronunciation, the former.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charles Neal
Canada
Nepean
Ontario
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Thanks Mike. I can see how with the impulse system players don't have to sit around waiting for their opponent to finish a turn.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charles Neal
Canada
Nepean
Ontario
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Eidelweiss wrote:
Makes sense. And I think this highlights why this rule set is good; you're altering the original rules a little, but keeping the original intentions, as far as you can guess them, in mind.


And... the GameX IF rules are more solitaire friendly. Perfect for the 'forever alone' gamer!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert McConnell
United States
South Carolina
flag msg tools
Armored Combat: It's all about position and getting the first shot.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I am chiming in here as a new adherent to this system. I think my favorite aspects of Mike Nagel's revision (Tactical Game X) comes down to several factors: 1. Spotting die roll for woods and towns; 2. Improved understanding of direct fire and indirect fire "H"-class weapons (increased values on mortars and infantry guns); 3. Best engineer rules I have read to date (except for the Advanced Panzerblitz Rules which are quite good as well); 4. Immensely simple force activation rules- really a no-brainer; 5. Scatter results for artillery, paratroops, and glider landings- again simple but elegant; and 6. Scenario morale levels for PB and PL- bravo! I think Mike hits it right, so I don't understand those who dislike the system as it is not confusing, to me, at all. My two cents.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Nagel
United States
Burlington
New Jersey
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Robert,

Thanks for the kind words and support. Most of all, I'm glad you're enjoying the rules set!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert McConnell
United States
South Carolina
flag msg tools
Armored Combat: It's all about position and getting the first shot.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Mike you did a great job with the rules- they do flow logically. I would treat artillery differently: each soft target gets attacked separately by the full artillery factor with all terrain benefits adjusted to benefit the defender. Units stacked together should be "punished" for doing so! cry I know density of fire is a key determinant, but smaller units should be harder to hit with a barrage. Much like individual tanks are highly unlikely (like only 1% probability of a kill) to be disabled by indirect fire. That is my only basic criticism. I actually think that some of the larger IF factors (40, 50, 60, 70, 80) should be reduced to the following values: 30,40,50; with 50 being the maximum allowed value. I am seriously redesigning the PB/PL infantry and artillery counters to reflect this for my PB/PL games. Really, really enjoyed reading your rules revisions!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Nagel
United States
Burlington
New Jersey
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Robert,

Thanks for the feedback. I understand your concern with the artillery rules. IIRC, I set them up that way to conform to the original design so that there would be minimal impact on how scenarios are played. What you note makes sense. I may have to go back and reconsider.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.