Skip to Content

Miniatures size, amount and damage tokens

40 replies [Last post]
X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013

I was wondering. How big do 3D miniatures have to be if I am to put damage tokens on them?

I am designing a wargame right now that has units and structures with only 1, 2, 4 or 8 health.
This means that we have 1, 3 or 7 damage to count.
This can be done for 7 damage, by 1+2+4 as damage tokens.
So the miniatures will be having 1, 2 or 3 holes to see damage tokens.

As tokens, I was thinking about little flames in 3 different colours, shapes and sizes. Their damage would be 1, 2 or 4.
Something like this (these are lego flames):

So, what would be the best size for these miniatures AND these damage tokens?
I am aiming for a rather durable game. Which would be 3D printed first for a prototype.

MAR's picture
Joined: 04/23/2017
Damage counters

I am not sure the size for counters on top, but there are miniatures that I have seen that have clickers in their base that count numbers for whatever your purpose is. I have never played it, but I think that Heroclix and other games do this. They seem to be durable figures and would save you from having other pieces? Or do you already know this and do not want to go this route?


X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
I am still open for any option

I am aware of these clickers.
But seeing as how my game would work. They are seeing hardly their full use.

One roll of the dice. And a rare chance that one unit will take damage. The rest lives or dies. The next round, this damaged unit will take more hits.

Only the 8 health units might have use. But I don't like having a mix.

The flat solution that I have right now is to have chits of 1, 2 and 4 damage.

pelle's picture
Joined: 08/11/2008
Since there are so few

Since there are so few possible values I think it is better to just use 7 different markers with numbers on and a single slot on each miniature.

Most people are not likely to appreciate the binary system you use. Every game I can think of use markers like 1, 3, 5 even when 1, 2, 4 would work better mathematically. Pretty sure many would not enjoy the exercise of having to figure out what markers to add or remove when damage changes.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
@ Pelle

No doubt you have at least 10 times more experience designing and playing these games.
That is why your answer strikes me as surprising, but also raizes wonder.

The only damages that are counted are 1, 2 and 4. So I thought of making the counters equal to these. That was my reasoning.

3 and 5 would be combinations of those damages and relatively rare. But they will occur. I can't deny that.

I will think about it and ask around what my friends think. But dear members of BGDF. What would you choose?


For comparisson:
Damage: 1/2/4 : 1/3/5
1: 1 : 1
2: 2 : 1+1
3: 1+2 : 3
4: 4 : 1+3
5: 1+4 : 5 (or 1+1+3)
6: 2+4 : 3+3
7: 1+2+4 : 1+3+3

I don't know. It doesn't matter much when looking at the numbers. But I could refrain from using the 5 damage too! It is waaay to rare to be added to the game. Only 2 counters instead of 3 does look apealing. But there is also more handling counters.

Going from 2 to 3 damage is in the 1/2/4 situation adding 1 counter or replacing 1 counter.
In the 1/3/5 situation we would get that the 8 health unit would gain 1 counter or, for 8 and 4 health, we would replace the 2 counters for 1 of 3.

(Having 7 different counters is IMHO a bit too much)

pelle's picture
Joined: 08/11/2008
7 is perhaps a bit much if

7 is perhaps a bit much if you look at it from a mathematical elegance pov, but in practice I do not see a problem.

If it is a problem you can make the slot deep enough that the marker can be rotated to only show one edge (or it is obvious enough which number is "up"). That way you can have 2 or 4 numbers per marker. Or 4 or 8 numbers if only one side of it is visible. Pollard markers they call them I believe.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
That is some good advice !

I think I know what you mean. Although google doesn't help this time.

I could do "pollard" markers with 1/3. Then I only need 1 type. This is briljant and only works with 1/3.

Only to think of to keeping it practical. Although, fancy 3d graphics will not be possible.

MAR's picture
Joined: 04/23/2017
Damage Counters

Ok, so these characters generally live or die, and damage is typically not a factor? Is damage then,repeated, or, does the character just live or die? Just wondering if there could be some alternative way for displaying the damaged character, but I'm not sure what your pieces look like. I like the idea of using the 1/3 chips. So far, its the best idea, but I will keep thinking.


X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
This is the combat so far

The game will have the following health:
1; which is instantly killed by all weapons.
2; which is instantly killed by all weapons with 2 or more damage. If this one fights another unit with 1 damage. It can take 2 hits.
4; which is instantly killed by the weapons with 4 or 8 damage. You need 4 hits of 1 or 2 hits of 2.
8; which can only be killed by the weapon that does 8 damage. All other weapons inflict damage.

Roll 3 or less for a hit per projectile.
Against structures, this will be 2 or less.

Please take note:
Overkill will NOT go to the next target!
This means that 8 damage will do just 1 damage on 1 health.

The weight factors are:
2 for 1 health or damage (infantry)
3 for 2 health or damage (light)
4 for 4 health or damage (medium)
6 for 8 health or damage (heavy)

It sounds weird, I know. But I limit players to a total score of 24 per hexagon.

MtG style:
This means that a region can contain 6 infantry that are 1/1 or only 4 infantry that are 1/4. By now, most players understand that the group of 1/1 has a higher chance of winning.
There is also a group of 3 medium 4/4. These have less chance against the 1/4. But a very good chance against the 4/1. Which in their turn easily defeat 1/1.

I am considering if I keep my cover system or not.

Units can take cover behind other units. As long as the frontline is bigger in points. I allow only a frontline and backline. 3 seemed a bit to much as well.

So far, infantry can't make proper use of it in a 1/1 squad. But mixing in some 1/2 or better will provide benefits for the overall effect.

More of this later.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
I don't own a copy of

I don't own a copy of memmoir44. How big are the hexes there?

My own original hexes feel to small for miniatures. 4 cm as point to point, equal to 1.5 inch. I think I would like to have at least 2 inch this time.

The miniatures will not be on scale. Tanks will rougly be 1.5 times as big as infantry.

6 infantry is a maximum. 4 for the lightest of tanks. It might be 5 if a certain card is used. Or I design in a simpler way.

MAR's picture
Joined: 04/23/2017
Alternate Damage Counter

I'm not sure what the hex sizes are off the top of my head- between 1-2 inches I think. You could always go with a larger size hex and allow multiple units to be in the hex at one time (even units from multiple teams/factions, maybe some kind of engagement rules would apply?). I am assuming here that these units are generalized and do not have individual cards, correct? A&A miniatures has individual cards, for example, but Risk and Memoir do not for their units. Maybe you could have mini dice next to them? Start them at 6 and count down with damage? Well, then you only have 6, but just thinking of alternate options. Perhaps you could count damage like Memoir. An infantry or tank unit has a few characters on the map, as as they are damaged, they are removed from the map?


X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
MAR wrote:allow multiple

MAR wrote:
allow multiple units to be in the hex at one time (even units from multiple teams/factions, maybe some kind of engagement rules would apply?).

You don't want to know what my hobby game had for rules regarding this. Right now, I am trying to simplify as much as possible.

You can move any where, as long as space permits it. If the enemy is blocking the path, kill a couple of units. Then there is a path. But every time when you want to move through this path with an enemy. You will come to a complete stop in that region.
Melee units (0 range) will become very useful path blockers. But also the ones to engage such stops.
I am planning a card for this that will ignore the rule one time.

MAR wrote:

I am assuming here that these units are generalized and do not have individual cards, correct?

I want to get rid of my A5 information cards.
And turn them into normal cards (to go with the bag of miniatures if I ever get that far).
Waaay less information. However, I still have a lot.
An alternative route would be a table of the statistics. But then I am limited to the number of designs. And the tier of 8 would be dropped.

- Health is visible by the holes. Unless I keep going with cardboard pieces.
- Durability, while not intended, structures have it by the general rules. Maybe a special rule for some. It would be applied on the damage roll. 3/6th or 2/6th is what I have. I could do any type of roll now from 1/6th to 6/6th.
- Speed
- Damage
- Amount of Projectiles
- Accuracy, while not intended. But maybe in the far future. So this too would be a special rule. This mechanic is so simple, that I can allow it.
- Range

MAR wrote:

Maybe you could have mini dice next to them? Start them at 6 and count down with damage? Well, then you only have 6, but just thinking of alternate options.

That was how my first version went. :) But I moved on to little white boards. And now it is time to say farewell to them.

MAR wrote:

Perhaps you could count damage like Memoir. An infantry or tank unit has a few characters on the map, as as they are damaged, they are removed from the map?

Now, that is something that I considered doing as well. And in regards to the infantry or any instant kill, it already is right now.
The problem lies in balance and my hidden RPS technique.


Talking about cardboard pieces. I am picturing 2x2x0.1cm again.
The smallest unit with health tracking so far would cost 3 and is a wall. A region can have 8 of these. That is to much, but they can be stacked and done with in no particular order.
The movable units, thus the ones which can switch cover etc. They would have a minimum cost of 6 (I want to refrain of 5). A player can have 4 of them on a hexagon.


Right now. The army I picture would have clear prices. It would be much simpler compare to the chaos that I once posted. I have 7 options.

12 * 2 (only one wall)
8 * 3
6 * 4 (most infantry)
4 * 6 (most light units)
3 * 8 (most medium units)
2 * 12 (most heavy units)
1 * 24


Then as a special rule, some units might be smaller, yet cost more.
I had a lot of fun with dividing size by 2,25 and multiplying costs by 1,5 with my hobby version. But that is not possible here. All I can do is divide size by 4 and multiply costs by 2.

24/4=6 and costs 48, you can have 1.
12/4=3 and costs 24, you still can have 2.
8/4=2 and costs 16, you still can have 3.
4/4=1 and costs 8, you still can have 6. And I have no idea what kind of infantry that could be.

MAR's picture
Joined: 04/23/2017
In the war themed game that

In the war themed game that we play around with, damage is similar to axis and allies (board game not minis). This means that if a unit survives combat, it returns to full health. It can be damaged during combat, however. How can this be accomplished or kept track of? When a battle happens, all units in the battle are taken off the map and places on a battle chart/ skirmish area. Maybe you would want to do something similar? It is hard to imagine the game without more images or context, but I am trying to stimulate thoughts. That will of course be potentially problematic in areas such as those with higher hit points that may not be overcome in one skirmish. From what I see in your post above, it appears to have more unit customization, such as weapon and other such modifiers, unlike games such as risk or Memoir that have standard units. All of this is on cards then? You could just apply the damage to the card (like Star Wars minis). That way you can keep the map from being clustered with tokens.


X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Thank you Austin for all your input.

(Be warned, a long post ahead)

Things to consider
I have a lot to consider with all the options you have given. Right now I am thinking about the following:

X3M wrote:

I am considering if I keep my cover system or not.

That was a couple of days ago.
MAR wrote:
You could just apply the damage to the card (like Star Wars minis). That way you can keep the map from being clustered with tokens.

The map will be clustered with tokens much more if I apply the cover system. But how much more?

Cover system
The cover system works like this:
There is a front line and a support line on 1 hexagon.
This is determined by the owning player as soon as they take fire.
The front line has to be bigger then the support line.
A tank (8 big) can give cover to an infantry unit (4 - 6 big). But the infantry unit cannot give cover to a tank.

If the infantry units are 4 big. The tank of 8 can even give cover to 2 infantry units.

With 24 points in mind. There can be only a maximum support line of 12. Anything more, and the attacking player may select a target of the support line.

-This system brings a lot of balance to a wargame.
-And allows for interesting situations.
-Healers/Repairs are possible. (Although, healing is not any more with infantry having only 1 health now)
-It is impossible to simulate this 100% with AI for testing. (I can know, we trialled 3 lines instead of 2 in the hobby version)
-Injured/Damaged units go to the support line and take tokens with them.
-A bit of extra time consumption on deciding the lines.
-A bit of extra time consumption on figuring out the next targets.


Concept: Playing a round
I am planning to construct a round like this:
- Players pick a number from a bag to decide the order of play for the next round.
- "Pre combat things to do." In order of players.
- Combat: Move or Attack.
- "After combat things to do." In order of players.

Concept: Combat
The combat would go like this:
-Player "1" moves or attacks with at least one unit, but at most an entire region. After the action, these units are exhausted for the round. A player also may refuse to do any thing. This is ok, but has to be careful that other players don't refuse as well. If they do, the round is over.
-Player "2" does the exact same thing.
-Back to player "1" again doing this. etc.
-Repeat until all players declare not taking an action or not being able too.

Why do I tell this about the phases of a round?
It is easily possible that a player will loose several hexagons worth of units in just one round. There won't be much tokens on the field this way.


Claiming tokens from the field?
Claiming tokens, while there are insufficient?
I could use a rule to claim them from units/structures that are already heavily damage.
But I worked this rule out and concluded that it is not worth the players time.

Right now, the way how the game works is best at the moment. Simply putting tokens on damaged units is the best way to go. Since there aren't much needed due to the strategy of players.
Of course, there can be "idiot" matches. In that case. I think I can calculate how much tokens are needed in total. And simply provide that much.


Back to topic: miniature sizes
This is how the sizes are pictures by me on the board for the miniatures.

But only in terms of basis. I read somewhere long ago, that 3d figures basis have the following rule: The long side may not exceed 2 times the short side. I don't know why, but I will keep it in mind.

I don't know how much the height may exceed. But I believe it had the same rule. No more then 2 times the short side.
Good for the infantry, but of no use for tanks. Maybe certain structures.
Height is a maximum, it can vary. But the width and length is something that I need to keep in mind.

All in cm.

2: 0.5 x 1 x H 1
or 0.625 x 0.8 x H 1.25
3: 0.75 x 1 x H 1.5
4: 1 x 1 x H 2
or 0.8 x 1.25 x H 1.6
6: 1 x 1.5 x H 2
or 1.2 x 1.25 x H 2.4
8: 1 x 2 x H 2
or 1.25 x 1.6 x H 2.5
12: 1.5 x 2 x H 3
or 1.2 x 2.5 x H 2.4
24: 2 x 3 x H 4
or 2.4 x 2.5 x H 4.8

Now looking at the 3. Here is our first keyhole for the defensive types. Either a wall, or a mobile wall.
How big should the keyhole be for the damage token?
A diameter of?

Damage token details
The damage token itself should have a yellow=1 and blue=3 side (color blind friendly?). It is actually just a pin. Maybe the numbers visible on them somehow. 1 cm long. Going 0.5 cm deep. I think the minimum height for the miniatures is now going to be 0.75 cm then.

I don't know if these sizes are too small. Maybe I need to upgrade them a bit.
I also don't know if the 3d printer of my cousin is able to do this.

MAR's picture
Joined: 04/23/2017
Overall, these seem like

Overall, these seem like reasonable conclusions, though without seeing the game itself it is not as easy to picture/ practice the game-play. I like the pegs in the car, like in Life. That is unique. Originally, I thought you were going to either have a character with no or a limited base (risk, axis and allies, memoir) or an actual mini-figure like star wars miniatures. I take it that you want a rectangular base then? Typically, the figures I have played with have round bases (tanks usually stand on their own).


X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
There are plenty of limitations as well

I discussed a lot with my cousin regarding 3d printing the miniatures.
To keep things short: It is certain that I need to up scale my plan. Maybe by a factor of 2 to 3.

Shapes for the basis are not set in stone.
I think that infantry will get a round basis.
The rest would probably be square or rectangle in shape. There is no need for a basis. As long as the shape from top view is somewhat that of the square/rectangle.

MAR's picture
Joined: 04/23/2017
Sounds good, I was confused

Sounds good, I was confused by your miniature/figures at first. Once you come up with something, take some pictures and post them for us to see! Also, its great that your cousin has a 3D printer, I always thought that it would be cool to have one and to experiment with it. Let me know how it goes.


X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
MAR wrote:take some pictures

MAR wrote:
take some pictures and post them for us to see!

That... might take a while.
[me]*[my cousin]=[product]³

- First, I need to make sure what theme exactly is going to be used. In terms of units. Dune, C&C, KKnD or something else.
- Will I be doing races, or just overall units? In the latter case, I need to find a way to show colours. Unless I make multiple prints with different colours like most games. My hobby chaos variant had a colour chit for each squad, a maximum of 18 per player. That was not funny! But, everyone could choose the same unit/structure. Just like how someone can put a deck together in MtG.
- After the decisions, I need to start designing the stats. This time, it will be simple and easy.
This because I only have 5+2 stats right now. And god forbid if I dare adding more before actually finishing something good!

Experimental Designs
Experimental Designs's picture
Joined: 04/20/2013
This approach would be ideal

This approach would be ideal for small games that were platoon level. However if you go with larger scale games that revolve around companies and regiments the tokens will start to become increasingly fiddly and cumbersome.

How big do you plan for your average game to be?

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
having problems with RPS @ the moment

Each battle, only 1 unit is damage. The rest has nothing or is dead.

A hexagon/region can contain the following or a mix of them:
6 infantry, 4 light vehicles, 3 medium vehicles, 2 heavy vehicles.

4 light vehicles can have at most 4 damage tokens.
3 medium vehicles can have at most 6 damage tokens.
2 heavy vehicles can have at most 6 damage tokens.

Those situations can arise when fighting the simple infantry. If 2 heavy vehicles fight other heavy vehicles. 1 hit and the heavy vehicle is dead. Depending on the weapons they carry.

But I am doubting the RPS mechanics. I think they are too weak to have a strategical meaning. I mean, having the best force would still mean loosing over half of your force.

Trapping is almost non-existent. A force can easily fight itself out or take at least an equal amount of units within its grave.

I really had trouble with balancing too. 'Overkill effects' and cover for 'infantry only squads' are non-existent. Only the bonus rule remained. And putting that on 100% instead of 50% brings forth weird results.

The game is stuck in its progress. Maybe I should bring back health for infantry. And simply scrapping a tier.
Infantry = 2 health. Light vehicles = 4 health and heavy vehicles = 8 health. With the weapons doing 1, 2 or 4 damage. Then we get more damage tokens.

6 Infantry vehicles can have at most 6 damage tokens.
4 light vehicles can have at most 8 damage tokens.
3 heavy vehicles can have at most 6 damage tokens.

I don't know yet which direction I should take. 100% bonus, or scrapping a tier to introduce more cover. But it still would mean a higher bonus then the 50% from my original game. I must await the simulators of my cousin.

questccg's picture
Joined: 04/16/2011
I have an IDEA for you...

Think about this:

Make it a Themed-WAR Miniatures ... like "Fucking" HATE! Go from something standard like "Infantry Vehicles" to "IAV" (Improvised Assault Vehicle) and go for some Dystopian universe much like "Mad Max"...

BUT instead of just playing your units, use a "Fog of War" that keeps your troop secret unit within "scouting" range. And then reveal units as necessary.

ALSO use customize platoon PET cards (22mm) and use Dry-Erase markers. So when you build your "platoon" you specify which units you have and then the pens are put aside and the battle can begin. During the battle you can, as I said earlier, use a "Fog of War" to only reveal units within range or scouting range (like a scout unit - if present)...

The PET cards will reveal if the opponent cheats or not... So because the PET cards are written on, you know exactly what units will be engaged in battle. But it's all about PROXIMITY and RANGE.

Something thematic along those lines -- with "Fog of War" and PET cards you can write on with Dry Erase Markers. I think it would be cool. And you can have multiple platoons too (maybe if your budget allows for such a thing... like a ton more miniatures... to be included as ADD-ONs). I know this is a hobby project, so you can invent all kinds of UNITS that are cool and have different abilities...


Update: You can even use REGULAR "cards". If you have 2 IAVs, your hand must have two (2) of those cards. Make your HAND to be the platoon you will be combating with!

And you could have BUILD-Rules that change according to your tribe's camp. Man I could REALLY picture this... and it would be cool!

Update #2: The difference between REGULAR "cards" and PET cards is that with regular cards you would need to "configure" a MINI-Deck (Platoon). With a single PET card, you could do the same. So MANY cards vs. 1 card (and dry erase marker)...

Update #3: And for once, I agree that you could have a MATHEMATICAL model/structure to follow when writing a platoon on your PET card. Like RANGE can be MAXIMUM but DAMAGE is MINIMUM... Sort of like averages. Or you could have AVERAGE RANGE and DAMAGE. With stats that you could WRITE and define ON the PET card...

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
My goal for the game

Not to sound ungrateful.

- An easy to read hexagon board.
Perhaps with levels in altitude or at least drawn that way. Modular is welcome too.
- Miniatures.
Or at least cardboard pieces in low amounts.
- Minor damage tracking.
Either suitable for the miniatures or for the cardboard pieces.
- And a small deck of Event Cards.
That will allow players to do special actions like Assault.

What I am trying to get rid of are:
- Small whiteboards and permanent markers. It is messy.
- That freakish Action Point menu!
- Unrealistic terrain effects. So no more terrain types. I only got altitude that says yes or no.
- XP effects. No more hero's that bite the dust moments later by Event Cards.
- No weird Event Cards that require players to roll many dice and calculate things.
- Players should not calculate things.

What I wish for, as heart of my game:
- Natural RPS.
- Strategy caused by this RPS.

Theme is not something to worry about right now. I need to get the heart right. It lacks something to work properly.
But it could be that I don't feel the RPS since it is so flat.

I think I am understanding my problem a bit more now.
The original game was having tanks doing their tanking job. And fodder doing their fodder job.
And if one side is doing their damage part, the other side has to be tanking or foddering.
But the current design is waaay to fast for tanks to soak up enough damage so that infantry can put out some damage. And the infantry die just as fast.

Rifle infantry beat bazooka infantry.
Bazooka infantry beat tanks.
And the original game had rifle infantry + bazooka infantry beating tanks harder.
But the current game makes them worse.
Mixing up used to be good. But now it is not!!

So one attempt remains.
A&A has a rule that might help here. And that is that the defender decides where the damage goes of all times.

eg. Player A does 6 damage with his rifle infantry. Player B has 6 light vehicles. Player B decides that each light vehicle will get 1 damage.

eg2. Player A has 3 rifle infantry and 2 bazooka infantry. Player B does 3 damage. Normally 2 rifle infantry and 1 bazooka would die. But the A&A rules state that only all rifle infantry will die.

eg3. Player A has 3 rifle infantry and 1 heavy tank. Player B does 6 damage with an heavy explosive and 3 damage with infantry. Player A can decide to take the 6 damage by sacrificing 1 rifle infantry. And the 3 damage on the heavy tank. Normally all damage would go to one target and the damage would be decided further by the attacking player.

Experimental Designs
Experimental Designs's picture
Joined: 04/20/2013
I think you misunderstood the

I think you misunderstood the question.

How large, as in the amount of models will be in play on an average game?

questccg's picture
Joined: 04/16/2011
A maximum depends on platoons

Experimental Designs wrote:
...How large, as in the amount of models will be in play on an average game?

I think this depends on how many "platoons" he allows in the game. If it's like three (3) (Left and Right Flanks + middle) well I believe you could have maybe five (5) miniatures per platoon. So maybe something like 15 miniatures x 2 players = 30 minis?! I'm just hypothesizing here.

@X3M: does this sound realistic???

BTW the game would require MORE miniatures, to account for "customization" of platoons. So maybe something like 50-60 miniatures. I'm no minis expert but based on some very popular KS campaigns, that number of minis is not unreasonable... It's very well possible that a typical miniature game has that many miniatures. And often we are talking about UNIQUE "minis. In this game, I believe you can have duplicate miniatures for various units used by both players too...

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Experimental Designs wrote:I

Experimental Designs wrote:
I think you misunderstood the question.

How large, as in the amount of models will be in play on an average game?

I see. My cousin talked about that his 28 mm figures where falling appart. So a bit bigger then that I think.

But my original inrention was having the infantry the size that starcraft the boardgame has. Stronger units are bigger.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Yes Questccg. Players could

Yes Questccg.

Players could still have a different stats card for their mini's.

The total size of an army on average.
About 20 infantry. (6+6+4+3)
About 15 light. (6+4+3+2)
About 12 medium. (4+3+3+2)
About 9 heavy. (3+2+2+2)

With spares. It is almost a total of 60 to 70.

The structures are not counted yet. But seeing this number. 1 player would be getting a total of 120 mini's.

Maybe still a bit to much.

Some Random Dude
Joined: 01/30/2014
Mansions of Madness

I would recommend something like what the monsters do in Mansions of Madness. There are little clips on the bases where counters can be held for damage.

The other option, depending on how many minis there are at any point, is what Gloomhaven does. There is a separate tile/sheet that you can put damage markers on for multiple monsters.

With these two options you can make the actual miniature as big or as little as you like!

questccg's picture
Joined: 04/16/2011
Here's some reduction of minis

X3M wrote:
About 20 infantry. (6+6+4+3)
About 15 light. (6+4+3+2)
About 12 medium. (4+3+3+2)
About 9 heavy. (3+2+2+2)

With spares. It is almost a total of 60 to 70...

How about:

  • 15 Infantry/"Heardsmen"
  • 5 Light/"Rocket Bikes"
  • 3 Medium/"Assault Vehicles"
  • 2 Heavy/"Armored Carriers"

Which is 25 in total. Each "platoon" can be made of ANY five (5) units.

And of course three (3) "platoons" is when you are near the end of the battle. You could start off with 3 "Heardsmen" and 1 "Rocket Bike"... And your "Fortress" (which is your base)...

Two (2) Players = only 50 miniatures...

X3M wrote:
Maybe still a bit too much.

I was going for alla "Mad Max" type of Dystopian Universe. Where you have crazy kind of old-tech with weaponry.

Just kind of had some FUN! But 50 minis is way more "approachable" in terms of COST to manufacture and the "sheer" quantity of them. Anyway it's really your game... I just went with what you said!

questccg's picture
Joined: 04/16/2011
Some more ideas...

"Armored Carriers" have medium weaponry but can "transport" up to five (5) "Heardsmen"... It's a "carrier" and it's good against other "Armored Carriers".

Whereas the "Assault Vehicles" have heavy weaponry. Good against "Rocket Bikes", other "Assault Vehicles" and "Armored Carriers".

"Rocket Bikes" are super-fast and are equipped with machine guns. Very effective against "Heardsmen" but not against other vehicles.

"Heardsmen" are like infantry, only good against itself (Fodder).

Hehehe... I can picture the "Rocket Bikes" like dirt bikes with machine guns attached to them... They can ride REAL FAST too!

I just felt like pondering on the THEME. I usually like to nail that down early. Gives me a "feeling" for the game and how to design it... Cheers!

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Fast bikes or buggies have

Fast bikes or buggies have always been my favourite units in any game. You can't see me without when playing on cncnet. And no matter what theme I come up with. I must have bikes as well. Might be hoover bikes.

Transport is something that I will not do in this game. The original did have transport. But it was relatively a nuisance.

While I said 20 infantry. It was more the 4 infantry types combined.

I often go with a [body types]x[weapon types] RPS.

With that, I mean that I have 4 different bodies and 4 different weapons for each player.

Not sure what you mean with rocket bikes that shoot with machine guns.

The following is only an estimate.
6 Infantry + anti Infantry (heardsmen)
6 Infantry + anti light
4 Infantry + anti medium
3 Infantry + anti heavy
6 Light + anti Infantry
4 Light + anti light
4 Light + anti medium
2 Light + anti heavy
6 Medium + anti Infantry
3 Medium + anti light
3 Medium + anti medium
2 Medium + anti heavy
3 Heavy + anti Infantry
2 Heavy + anti light
2 Heavy + anti medium
2 Heavy + anti heavy

And that is where the "perhaps too much" comes from.
I am considering getting rid of 1 type. Reducing the 16 to 9. It is probably the heavy types that will bite the dust.

I would change the sets to Infantry, Vehicles and Tanks.

And why would I do that? I have discovered that the foddering and the tanking is to weak. And to make sure this strategy is made more clear. I am going to change certain rules regarding the dice.

The basic accuracy is going to be linked to what weapon hits which health class.

I have 2 options open at the moment:

Option 1 (linear).
The dice are going to simply follow rolling a 3 or less is a hit. But on the wrong type it will be rolling 2 or less (or even 1). This means that the durability of any wrong target is 150% (or even 300%).

Option 2 (exponential).
The dice are going to be linked to the combinations.
The 3 types of weapons will be doing 1, 2 or 4 damage (8 is scrapped, remember?)
The targets will have 1, 2 or 4 health.
The basic accuracy will be 4. But if one of the 2 factors is less then the other. There will also be a division.
2 damage on 4 health? The accuracy is 2.
1 damage on 4 health? The accuracy is 1.
4 damage on 2 health? The accuracy is 2.
1 damage on 2 health? The accuracy is 2.
4 damage on 1 health? The accuracy is 1.
2 damage on 1 health? The accuracy is 2.

I like the second option more. But it is harder to explain to players. It does follow the natural RPS, despite being mechanical itself. On the other hand, the linear RPS is mechanical to its core.

Maybe I should also double up the health of all units. Thus infantry having 2. Vehicles having 4. Tanks having 8. But then players need to know that 2 damage on infantry has to be 1 damage. And 2*1 damage on infantry is truly 2.


Having chips in the base of a miniature also sounds good. No holes in the actual body.


Right now, I am thinking of a stats deck to come with the game. Or at least the miniatures.
1 card will contain the information and a cool pictures of 1 of the miniatures. All the miniatures on the board, owned by that player will have those stats.
The stats are:
Miniatures allowed.
Costs and size per miniature.

X3M's picture
Joined: 10/28/2013
Theme is yet to be decided.

While I don't dislike the MadMax theme. I don't like it either personally.

I do like the KKnD or Warzone2100 theme.

All 3 are post ww3 themes.

The KKnD and Warzone2100 theme is around high tech weaponry in a desolate landscape.
It also allows for more exotic weapons like rail guns, lasers, incendiary howitzers etc.

Syndicate content

forum | by Dr. Radut