A reboot of the game nights (wargame, hobby variant)

See title.

The ATV is one of the units that I would have never designed, if it was not for that particular mission with water and an objective behind it.

It also triggered me to reconsider other mechanics. I still need to complete the construction/production mechanics. But, for what?

At least the medics and mechanics are designed well. And the mechanic, I have various variants. I could easily design one with repairing both light and heavy vehicles in a fair way.

There are RTS that force a player to come out of their comfort zone. How? Resources are all over the map. If you don't come out, you will get less resources. And the furthest intended is in the middle of the map.

I also limited resources a long time ago. Because the "14" evenings match was something that only proved the rules are balanced.

My goals for the biggest matches are:
- Max of 3 times resources per player, distributed evenly over the map. With a 7th pool in the middle of the map. A group of 3 along the middle line is also optional.
- Mobile construction for tactical defenses. Or even a offensive strike by placing a defense at the enemy.
- 1 specific unit specialized in outranging the defense with the longest attack range. A minimum of +2 is required here.
- 2 teams only. A FFA will cause campers.
- Players can compete against the AI. This way, an odd number of players can play.
- A super weapon. Fun fact, if you have enough resources and builders. You can build one in the first round already. Thus firing in round 2.
- A map with nice tactical keypoints.

My goals for the current situation are:
- 2 players, that can compete by tracking points.
- The ai has almost all resource pools. Except for the starting area. Thus 2x for the 2 players and 5x for the ai. Wait too long, resources deplete. Chances on winning become minimal. Even against the ai.
- That map, with nice tactical keypoints.

As you can see. Map design is very important.

Resources and tactical positions are key.
But also, keeping weak spots open for pushing players to take action.

As for a more Wargame orientated gameplay.
I could reduce resources to eventually 0.
Limit construction to nothing. So no construction will happen.
Give a small base. Which, once destroyed. Will give a player a disadvantage.

There has always been a limit on troops. If I still allow unlimited resources. But a limited production. Reaching a maximum would push a player into taking cation as well.

Attackers in a conclave have an advantage. 7 vs 3 would be the maximum difference in fighting. Even if the defender has a +1 or +2 height advantage. Which means a penalty of 25/36 at most. Or 175/36 versus 108/36. Heck, 875/216 versus 648/216 belonging to +3 height difference is still better for the attacker.

Camping is rewarding at first

A HQ could produce anything.

I believe I already said what a complete game. And my current goal, would look like. But if not. I do it again.

Just a reminder: I add stuff, then cut. In waves.

A complete game would be a copy of c&c AND Starcraft games.

The traditional things that are required are:
- A main starting building. This one can do 1 or multiple things. Which can be one of the following...
- Base construction.
- Unit training.
- Resource gathering.
- Resource managment. Turning resources into credits.
- Resource or credit storage.
- Power managment. In a board game, it could make base buildings cheaper.
- Unit managment. Same as with power, but then for units.

Other "defending" objects can provide the following:
- Provide cover.
- Being the cheapest option for defending a base.

Of course, for my games. I already have drawn a line right after storage.

But for the faster games. The line is sooner.

As for the comment on open maps. I have them too. Moving units have an advantage here.
A bit of crowded, and the ranged units get an advantage.
But very crowded, and the moving units get an advantage again.
Defenses cannot move. But this makes them cheap and perfect for defending a base.

Of vourse, getting defenses on a tactical point is an option too. You simply invest time.

And keep in mind that I limit players in what they can build.
If a defense costs 1200.
In a small game, you can get only 3 of these.
Medium means 4 and big means 5.
With a 900 cost, we get 4, 5 and 6. With the 5 and 6 also providing the player Strategy Points.

In responds to having different factions. I say, no problem. But not for a 1+1 vs ai game that gets only 3 hours.

The ammount of different units (and factions) that I designed so far is ridiculous.

But then you play a single player mission vs an AI that is just standing there. Keep in mind, I do this from my head for now.

The first unit:
Rifleman, cost 100, size 100, (sumsize 100)
Movement 2, Attack range 2, (Salvo 1)
Armor 1, health 5
Damage 1, Projectiles 1, Accuracy 5/6

What matters in mission 1 is actually:
Rifleman, cost 100, size 100
Movement 2, Attack range 2
Armor 1, health 5
Damage 1, Projectiles 1, Accuracy 5/6

The following chapters in the rules:
- Unit stats
- Terrain influence
- Player order
- Action points
- Combat mechanics; normal dice.

There is no resource managment. Nor is there production. So, all a player can do is play with the riflemen. Just in order to get a feeling on how the units are to be used.

Unit stats
Rifleman, cost 100, size 100
Movement 2, Attack range 2
Armor 1, health 5
Damage 1, Projectiles 1, Accuracy 5/6

The cost will become important in future missions. A player is limited in what it can train/build each round. The cost is used to determine how much resources are deducted and turned into train/building materials that round. For now, this can be ignored.

The size will mostly be explained in the Terrain influence chapter. The game allows a limit of ground units and/or water units. Obstruction can also be overruled by unit attributes. The total of a region can be either 3600, 4800 or 6000. In case of the rifleman, with a size of 100. A maximum per region can be 36, 48 or 60 units.

Movement of 2 means that this unit may move at most 2 if the action move is applied.

Attack range of 2 will be a simple check. To see if a target is within range. If the distance is +1. The player can check, based on size, if these units fit in the target region. If not, a bonus attack range of +1 can be applied. An extra penalty on attacking and moving will also be applied. See the chapter on Action points.

Armor of 1 means that any weapon that hits, will have its damage reduced to 1. You may also read this as a maximum damage allowed of 1 per hit. This means that weapons with 1 damage will remain unchanged. Weapons with 2 damage or more are reduced to 1. There are weapons that can deal 400 damage. But these are reduced to a lower value, equal to the targets armor value. You may also read the armor as a type of armor. Meaning that the type of armor 1 is the type of 1.

A health of 5. Is a default ammount of health. When it reaches 0, the unit dies. Health value's of 1 are possible. These are relatively cheaper. The tanking effect from RTS is overrules by the fodder effect in this game.

Damage of 1, means that any weapon that hits, will have its damage being 1 or reduced to a targets armor value. In other words, you can consider the damage value as a maximum damage allowed of 1 per hit. Now, if a target has more armor, by default it has more health as well. Thus the 1 damage is less in effect against higher armored targets.

Projectiles of 1. Means that this unit starts its rolls for 1 projectile per attack.

Accuracy 5/6th...Since you roll d6. The accuracy is actually 5. But different d6 rolls are possible in future games. Hence the 5/6 is mentioned instead. If a player rolls 5 or less, the projectile remains a hit. A 5/6th roll equals a penalty of 1.

As for having 36 riflemen. In old games, 36 dice were used. Now, we have different coloured d6 for 1, 3 or 9 projectiles per roll. 6x1 + 4x3 + 2x9 are used for the 36 projectiles. So that only 12 dice are in the hand.
You roll these, and any 5 or less remains as a hit. The rest is discarded. It could be very possible that you roll 2x6 on the 2x9 dice. Which means that these are then goners. And you are stuck with half or less in the number of hits.

Terrain influence
Each region offers space to either ground, water, special obstruction like forests or other debris. If there is not enough space, then units and buildings cannot fit in entirely as 1 big squad. Also, moving through will require more than 1 move action. The players will get the opportunity to spend more AP in 1 turn, for a better mobility.

Units with a certain attribute on their propulsion are able to cross or even stand in regions that is not accesable to other units.

Each region has a terrain height. Moving to a higher region will give a penalty on the space for movement. In 3600 games, this is 1/6th per difference in height. 4800 has 1/8th and 6000 has 1/10th as penalties. With a height difference of 6 in a 3600 game, you cannot move from 1 region to the other. Unless you have very special attributes for this.

Shooting to a higher region will reduce the attack range by 1 per difference in height. It will also apply a penalty of 1 per difference in height. This means that with a height difference of 6. The unit needs to have at least an attack range of 7 (or 6 with bonus range rule). And a penalty of 6 is applied, which equals (5/6)^6 = (2/6).

Between regions. Are the crossover regions. These only change the conditions for movement. If a crossover region is water, ground units cannot pass. Vice versa, if a crossover region is ground in a water region, ships cannot pass.

Each region is a combination of 2 different or equal regions. A cross over region can have the same. It is a #/6 portion. The basic space is based on basic units. While the ground variants are mentioned for the obstacles, the same obstacles can be applied to water. And the space that is added. Is not for water, nor ground.

Personally, I should rephrase this portion of the manual. Obstacles add a bit more space to the basic space. And ground or water are both basic spaces. I understand if players do NOT understand. For example, monkeys can ignore the tree's obstacles. And this means that a mangrove forest would allow the monkeys to travel through as well.

Obstacles also reduce vision. This is done in a form of penalties. As for subterrain, these have subterrain weaponry. And then water would block ground and vice versa as well.
The reduced vision, see the forest. 2 forest portions turn into a vision of 2. This means that a roll of 2/6 is applied to each projectile that flies through this forest.

I just noticed. I don't mention anywhere that firing into a forest, also gives a penalty to the player. But this penalty is only 50% of the original value. If a target decides to hide instead, the penalty is applied as if the targetted region is actually between the attacker and defender.

Player order

Yeah, we did some of the choices as a test. But basicly. We decide the turn order per round at most. Or switch each round to the next. Thus roulating the turn order.

In the latter, most of the time, you are always in front or behind your "neighbouring" player.
1234
2341
3412
4123
Where 4 is in front of 1, for 75% of the time. But also behind 3, for 75% of the time.

Action points
This chapter can be huge.

But basicly. There is a player in turn.
The other players re-act.

The player in turn MUST spend at least 1 AP.
The other players can save up their AP.

An action is either a move, attack or both.
A re-action can also contain a hide or intercept.
Other (re-)actions may contain a transformation, maintenance, looting or lure.

Each action has its own AP cost. But if a squad spend AP that round already. You need to spend this AP again, and then add the new AP cost.

For the most basic cost of 1. You get:
Turn 1: +1 AP = 1 AP, a total of 1 AP
Turn 2: +1 AP + Turn 1 AP = 2 AP, a total of 3 AP
Turn 3: +1 AP + Turn 2 AP = 4 AP, a total of 7 AP

Each player receives 7 AP to begin with. Thus 1 squad can perform 3 actions in 3 turns. Or a player can choose to have 7 squads, each perform 1 action in 7 turns.

Some units will have a higher salvo, which requires more AP for an attack.

For the first mission. Either move, attack or both.

Ok, here is one that is questionable...

According to the rules. A proper commando will follow the 2+98% configuration. And its stats are +150%. Due to it being a ridiculous support type.

Most RTS have the commando costing 1k to 2k. I could go for a 1800 one. So that a player can have 2. But also that a commando can take cover?

Here is the thing. A 1800 cost would mean a total value of 4500. Of which 2% is worth 90. So 90 into body points. A rifleman has 50 as comparrison.
The damage side is 4410. Don't bother figuring out how much damage it does. Just remember that again, a rifleman as comparrison has only 50 points.

While a rifleman costs 100, and has a size and sumsize of 100.
A commando has a cost of 1800, size 1800 and sumsize 4500.
The latter means that a commando will not take a ride in an ATV.

***

A reduced size of a factor 9 is required in order to have a nice sumsize of 500. And the normal size is only 200. Now then. A couple of walls or an ATV are enough to cover or carry this little boeger. But the downside is that this guy now will cost 3 times more. 5400 in total. This is fair though. But in a sense, not worth your time.

A smaller variant would have a cost of 1200 (60+2940) and a sumsize of 3000. A player can have 3 of these. A factor of 4 would now result in it costing 2400. And having a size of 300. A sumsize of 750. Unfortunately, an ATV cannot carry this guy. Yet, if we use the factor of 2.5 and thus 6.25. The size is now 192 with sumsize 480 while the cost is 3000.

So.... I got several options here. And there are more.

***

Cover from a basic wall = 100
ATV cargo room = 600 biological units without firing ability

To get an idea of firepower.
A normal infantry has 5 health.
And a rifleman can kill 0.28 other riflemen per turn.

In that same turn, a weapon with a value of:
4410 kills 24.5
3920 kills 21.8
2940 kills 16.3
2450 kills 13.6
1960 kills 10.9
On average that is.

Version: Body 90 + Weapon 4410, 2 allowed *
Equals 18 riflemen with Body 900 + Weapon 900
1.0 Cost 1800, Size 1800, Sumsize 4500
1.5 Cost 2700, Size _800, Sumsize 2000
2.0 Cost 3600, Size _450, Sumsize 1125
2.5 Cost 4500, Size _288, Sumsize _720
3.0 Cost 5400, Size _200, Sumsize _500 *

Version: Body 80 + Weapon 3920, 2 allowed with 400 SP
Equals 16 riflemen with Body 800 + Weapon 800
1.0 Cost 1600, Size 1600, Sumsize 4000
1.5 Cost 2400, Size _711, Sumsize 1778
2.0 Cost 3200, Size _400, Sumsize 1000
2.5 Cost 4000, Size _256, Sumsize _640
3.0 Cost 4800, Size _178, Sumsize _444

Version: Body 60 + Weapon 2940, 3 allowed *
Equals 12 riflemen with Body 600 + Weapon 600
1.0 Cost 1200, Size 1200, Sumsize 3000
1.5 Cost 1800, Size _533, Sumsize 1333
2.0 Cost 2400, Size _300, Sumsize _750
2.5 Cost 3000, Size _192, Sumsize _480 *
3.0 Cost 3600, Size _133, Sumsize _333

Version: Body 50 + Weapon 2450, 3 allowed with 600 SP
Equals 10 riflemen with Body 500 + Weapon 500
1.0 Cost 1000, Size 1000, Sumsize 2500
1.5 Cost 1500, Size _444, Sumsize 1111
2.0 Cost 2000, Size _250, Sumsize _625
2.5 Cost 2500, Size _160, Sumsize _400 *
3.0 Cost 3000, Size _111, Sumsize _278

Version: Body 40 + Weapon 1960, 4 allowed with 400 SP
Equals 8 riflemen with Body 400 + Weapon 400
1.0 Cost 800, Size 800, Sumsize 2000
1.5 Cost 1200, Size _356, Sumsize _889
2.0 Cost 1600, Size _100, Sumsize _500 *
2.5 Cost 2000, Size _128, Sumsize _320 *
3.0 Cost 2400, Size __89, Sumsize _222

* Nice "round" numbers to work with

I am tired of trying to make maps in Paint. While I have to toggle stuf etc.

So, I got my hands on Hexdraw. Still need to get used to this program. But after copying a certain map of mine. I get the feeling I can do a lot with it.

Going to see if it is usefull enough for me to get the full version as well.

Well.... I can't seem to find a full version. So that I can export.
Turns out, the person making Hexdraw has a 3D wargame on Steam now.

As for the graph paper. I have plenty of old material on my pc. Might as well turn to those again.
But less detailed should be key here. Because a simple terrain is easier to read. Not that fancy bad photograph map.
I have a copy of that graph paper on my pc. For a quick draw of a map idea. It is a good start for rough idea's.

In fact, just drawing on paper would be much better now. And I used to have a 360 view, except for height. Might as well make it isometric view.

Well, I would love to have my buddy to design some units as well. For himself.

And I need to guide him in it. But he would certainly love to have his own faction.

Also, my OCD tics. If I solidfy some more ratio's to a more digital environment. I will have more peace with certain designs. But then again, I just wanted to share some numbers.

I always loved the semi support designs in RTS.

(Seems mustard and milk go well together)

4-16 is the same as 1-4.

9-25 has the factor 34/30.7.
270 in costs would roughly be 300 in stats.
80-225 is a good one in this. Costing 270.
90-250 obviously results in a cost of 300 with rounding down for 2%. But....90-240 gives almost an exact cost of 300. So... I need to reconsider here.
30-80 gives a very nice 100. And these are good numbers to work with for infantry.

Maybe I should stop this. And rather use summary numbers instead. Like that 30-80 gives 100. And the imbalance is less than 0.02%.

You know what. I am going to set up a little excel that will give me some "round" numbers to work with.

I found a couple more promising links.
Will try to share them asap.

But I need to rethink the rules on my terrain as well. Instead of focussing on how terrain looks like.
I should set up rules on the meaning of a terrain.

I got land or water.
The terrain can also have 3 levels of softness or solidity.
Snow/Ice, Grass/Seaweeds etc., Concrete/Road.
Obstruction in the form of; tree's/roots, rocks/bedrock, civilian structures/foundation.

I want ridges too.
But so far, I think I need to have a ridge simply be part of the hexagon. And not expand to another ridge. The way how this should look like is difficult to explain.

I already did some research. And a tile that contains for example, a road. Well, there are 121 versions of them in my game. With, or without a central concrete area.
And I have yet to think of cities and stuff...

This means only 1 thing. I cannot make them all. But have to make them when I need them.

The same goes with ridges etc. And why you might ask? Because I was going to draw the things in an isometric way.

It is bad.

I should not attempt such thing. And simply have the regions being able to turn 60 degrees.

So, what about height?
Well, I could do something with the centre marker. The centre...I don't need it anymore. So a symbol that indicates how high a region should be, can now replace it.

An asterix or *. Well, one with 6 points. Then a hollow star. And it grows bigger and bigger. Something like that. A number is bad. Unless I have this one go 60 degrees and is used 6 times per hexagon. Again....bad.

So, would it be an option to simy raise the terrain? I need to find material for this. And the minimap that lets me build the big map can be drawn though.

But that would force me to have other material than just print and play. I don't want that.

In short, just having a flat map and reprint the portion that is supposed to be higher. Then paste these on some cardboard. Might work... yeah, that sound better.
I got plenty of cardboard laying around at my job.

Now then. As for the regions. If I want 60 degrees. I should make them top down view again. And not the digital crap. No shadows either.

I don't have the list with me. But I found an interesting webside that actually lets me design maps. Albeit, no height indicator.
I could make the map. Then see what the pieces are. And then simply aplly the rules I have in mind for space etc.

Perhaps I should post the old system. And then see what idea's others can come up with?

We have 3 "dimensions"; ground, air, sub.
We also have height differences.

As for the terrain itself...

There are 3 types of terrain divided into 8 subclasses:
- [U] 3,0, Urban (Obstacles: Long term fundaments in ground)
- [C] 3,3, Concrete/hard dirt (Ground)
- [G] 2,3, Grass (Ground)
- [D] 1,3, Desert/sand (Ground)
- [W] 0,3, Water (Water)
- [S] 2,2, Snow/fog (Obstacles: Ice ground)
- [T] 1,1, Tree’s or forests (Obstacles: Roots in ground)
- [R] 0,0, Rocks (Obstacles: Bedrock)

The letters are not used anymore. We can tell by looking at the terrain. The terrain had 2 types all the time.
The first number is the space they provide.
The second number is the vision (accuracy) they allow.

As for the 3 types, I am actually referring here to the Ground, Water and Obstacles. Obstacles can occur on ground and on water. And obstacles only affect ground and subterrain or submarine.
As for air units, they can move over ground, water AND obstacles. Thus while a hoover has +50% on movement speed. Air has +100%.

***

Perhaps this system is good. I just need to test and reconfirm that having ridges being linked to their host hexagon only. Works properly.

Perhaps I need to change the numbers.

So, we got a main hexagon and its ridges.
A ridge can act as a sub hexagon with another ridge.
OR
A ridge acts as a sub hexagon and another ridge acts as a sub hexagon as well.
But no matter what I choose, a ridge will only adres movement.

I think the latter works well for me.

We go from one hexagon to another. And one of the 2 ridge portions is an actually ridge, with base terrain of rocks. This means that the movement here is based on 0 space for ground units.

If we have 2 ridges connected. That for example have a forest type and a grass type. Then the forest type is the one that counts for movement. Meaning that there is only a 2/6th in space for moving through. Think of a line of tree's that block most units.

But if we have monkeys that ignore the tree's in regards of space. It will be the grass that supplies us with the space in between. Which is 4/6th.

Oh, if terrain differs in height. The movement over the ridge will be -1/6 on 6/6 times the height difference.
The result is multiplied with the space.
What this means is that in a 3600.
2/6 is only 1200.
And a height difference, for example 5. Is a 1/6th on that 1200, which is only 200.
Now you might see why it is very usefull to get one of those snipers being a size 200 only. :)

In a 4800 game, we would go down to 1600. But then the rule is applied that we do -1/8 or -1/4 on 8/8 or 4/4. Depending on the choice. We either get 3/8 or 0 with that 5 difference.
600 is a lot. 0 is not...

In a 6000 game, we can do the same. First we go down to 2000.
Then choices are -1/10 or -1/5. We are left with 1000 or 0.

I am really considering having a smaller hexagon grid. And then have each hexagon being just 1 terrain type. Thus a forest would contain multiple hexagons, each providing a tree.

As for the units and buildings. Their movement and attack range is still digital. But becomes a bit more detailed.
I am worried about the attack range though. It is without a rope these days. And from what hexagon are they shooting?

As for the size? Perhaps having 7 hexagons as a requirement for a unit to be? The units should be in hexagon shape as well now.
The 6 outer hexagons would only be occupied for like 40%. So the game remains playable. So, the centre hexagon acts as the main one. But moving 1 to the side is a change of 3 hexagons.

I think this is doable. But I need to test it out. If I have this, I should certainly not allow stacking different locations with overlapping hexagons.

Somehow, I feel this is too complicated.

Another option is, no ridges. Just 1 type of terrain (or a mix). And have high ground intermediate hexagons prior.
0.5 height difference is not really an option. Perhaps a high ground of 1. Starts with the "ridges" being 1 high as well.

But wait. This does not solve my river problem. What I get is full hexagons with water. I should draw the river in such a way that it is clearly not containing land. That is the only solution right now.

Still, if anyone is reading this. Perhaps you have a suggestion.