Commanders and aces

It seems to me that the two big ideas are the commanders and the aces, which makes sense given the title of the thread. Distinguishing the "Aces" by having them be a different miniature construction seems like a cool, new idea, but it would be lost on someone that's not very familiar with miniature gaming. That's me. I don't know what a "mutltipart kit" is. I'd therefore recommend this idea be used in a game that's for advanced audiences.

The "Commanders" seem like a cool idea, and I haven't heard of someone else having the idea. The commanders, as you've proposed them, are pretty bare, and as such can be taken in a lot of directions. The first thing I think of is having the off-board command center correspond to several areas, i.e. several battlefields, i.e. several real-life tables whereupon several games are happening simultaneously. That would be impractical, enormous, and super cool to see someone play. Anyway, what kind of miniatures would the commanders be? Mono-pose or multi-pose?

I just wanted to add a "small" comment about "Miniatures". Mike (RIP) designed them and had me review the Tactical Design about how(?) they worked. Basically the "Miniatures" could be "Tokens" (2mm thick chipboard) rather than being "Minis" and that's why many Backers went from the Vanguard Pledge Level to the Tactician Pledge Level ... Simply because "almost" everyone WANTED the miniatures... But they were NOT essential, so go figure.

Both the Miniatures AND the "Tokens" had the SAME purpose: to bestow an ability as defined by the "Token" (or mini if you prefer). That was the purpose of the "Reinforcements Module". And to be really HONEST, the "Miniatures" came out to be pretty AWESOME (in terms of quality).

But like you say, they were OPTIONAL and many people decided to CHOOSE THEM instead of the "Tokens"... So you never know.

I don't think that kind of "actual Movement" is key. More like you have "Action Points" that account for some kind of "Distance". Like 1 AP to move to an adjacent station and like 3 APs to move across the board to a more distant station. It could be something like that too... Not necessarily pure "movement" but Action Points and "relative" distances between two command posts for example... And you get like 4 APs per turn and can play cards down from a hand to BOOST the amount of APs you have on a turn...

Just saying it doesn't need to be ACTUAL "movement" but RELATIVE POSITIONING.

Again this is a different perspective. I'm just saying depending on HOW it is implemented and how the simulation and off-board work. It might be of interest ... TBD!

Cheers all.

I was currently working on a similar game. Where territories would still be present. But the movement and attack range would be dumbed down to miniature positioning within the territory.

In combination to have a HQ in a territory, owned by a player. Here, miniatures could be placed that can give certain buffs etc to the units accross the table/room. But it would also have the structure nessesary for deployment etc.

I think the structures need to be multiparters as well. Perhaps giving them different parts for different purposes.

A War Factory that has not 1 but 2 doors in front would be allowed to make bigger and thus stronger vehicles. Not one but 2 chimneys would allow some other tech. And if there is no chimney, the production would allow simply something else.

A 2x2 structure, in 4 parts. Would allow 100% production. Missing a part would lower this in obvious reasons.

So, not a commanding figure, but a structure instead.

And this "WAR ROOM" could be subject to CARDS a little bit like @X3M was suggesting.

Maybe you can PLAY A CARD in an AREA of the "WAR ROOM" which alters the EFFECT of that STATION:

I kept it generic but you get the idea (I hope).

Some CARDS have 2 POSITIONS and means you can PLAY TWO (2) different "Tokens" at the SAME Station.

Something like that too... The off-board could be 2 ROWS of 5 "Cards". Movement could be relative and Action Point (AP) based too.

And getting from one side of the off-board to the other side takes like 5 APs. (If you think about the format of 5 stations x 2 rows = 10 Stations).

That could have some REAL potential. Anyhow... I haven't seen @Biggle Bear for Months (Since April 2026). And so I have no idea if he will chime-in and see what he thinks about these IDEAS!

Cheers all.

I like this; just imagining those distinctive polygons evokes militaristic feelings in me.

Now that's a good idea. Stark contrast.

Pf, doubtful. If he does come back, I expect his game will have taken a completely different direction that what we've imagined here