Some days ago we had a thread about annoying wargame mechanics, and some interesting points were made, but let's get to the other extreme: what game mechanics do you think are innovative or interesting in miniature wargames?
>>44256662
Biggest ones I've seen are Malifaux's card system and Wrath of Kings one-roll system.
Malifaux's is interesting, since it not only really fits the theme of the game, wild west Victorian era, but it changes the math used to predict "rolls". Instead of a flat probability, the use of a set limit of randomly determined outcomes, supplemented by the Cheat Fate mechanic, makes for an interesting model.
Wrath of Kings, while a little clunky, is interesting. You roll the number of D10's for the attack and compare it to a chart on the model's card. All the info for hitting, damaging, blocking, evading, etc., is on the card. While this typically end up being "You need X+ to wound", there are things that interact with the chart. Ranged attacks ignore certain results, and attacks will have rules that modify results on the chart.
>>44256662
Xwing has some interesting things.
Maneuver templates being one. Having players put down their moves all at once without seeing what the other guys does first (barring abilities and such) is pretty neat and leads to some shenanigans.
Also runs a similar dice mechanic to infinity where certain rolls can counter the other persons roll like Face to Face, which makes it feel like you're not just taking it up the ass when you got shot at.
I like warmachine Jack mechanics too. Where damage thresholds shut down various systems on your mech. Also the host of generic Jack abilities in that game like "Two Handed Throw" is just really fluffy and neat.
Guildball team building mechanics are worth mentioning too. No point values, you just take 6 mooks and engage.
Also worth mentioning is Infinities Points/SWC/AVA stuff. Having multiple little caveats for building armies makes list building pretty interesting and Sectorials are really neat with the AVA adjustments. For example in a sectorial suddenly some niche choices become really good due to their availability and how they compliment other models.
>>44256662
The Lord of the Rings Strategy Battle Game, and its most recent incarnation of The Hobbit (which I assume uses the same rules), has the Might and Fate points mechanics, which are something I've always found amazing in and of itself.
Basically character models have stat lines that are similar to that of their regular unit compatriots (i.e. a Captain of Gondor has stats very close to a regular soldier of gondor), but characters get Might and Fate points that allow them to change dice rolls, or re-roll dice in certain circumstances. Not only that, but magic users get Magic points, which they use to attempt to cast spells.
It was a system that gave an amount of resource management and extra risk to the game, but also let heroes stand out without owning the game.
>>44256662
Force on Force's (well, originally ambush alley's) Action/reaction system.
Whilst not exactly the most elegant of things, the mechanics mean that firefights are exactly that. Constant exchanges of fire as a given combined with reactions that include movement as well as shooting. And the way you have to announce what you're attempting to do for the reaction system to work means you are in constant communication with your opponent, with words even, rather than the typical grunt, point, roll dice routine or having time to check your phone or go for a piss whilst the other guy is pushing units around before shooting starts.
The use of multiple different dice types to denote different qualities of troops is also good. Getting away from everything being on a D6 really helps differentiate things.
Anything using a card system to add extra events to the game that are outside the scope of the usual dice results. This I've seen turn up in games that try to be more cinematic in style as well as games that are most definitely trying to be a simulation of reality. Dead Man's Hand, 7TV, Force on Force and many others come to mind, and as long as the system is well thought out, it can lead to interesting changes in what is going on.
Some examples of that would be things like cover turning out to not be as protective as thought, ammunition shortages or mechanical problems with equipment, sudden changes in mission objectives, reinforcements getting lost and not turning up where planned for or characters getting lucky against incoming fire that should have by all rights killed them.
It helps add to the narrative of the battle, and in some ways, the simulation.
>>44257244
I really like the Jack abilities, though they haven't come to play in the few games I've played and I wish they did.
Granted it was casual games between a friend and I, not sure how often slams and throws are preformed in games with decent players
>>44256662
No End In Sight with how the game handles fire combat is pretty neat.
Units generating firepower in both suppression and casualty-causing dice rolls. In short, a unit shooting will generate 1 kill dice for every 2 shock dice, shock dice being equal to their firepower rating, which for a typical rifle toting dude will be 1 or 2.
Using D6s, shock dice will pin a target on a roll of 5 or 6, where as kill dice may injure a target on a roll of a 6, targets will generally get a cover save that turns that into a pin result. Casualties are not automatically dead and have to be rolled for, and possibly treated because having casualties that are injured and untreated means the unit is going to be less effective. Abandoning injured comrades is also pretty bad for the unit.
It all leads into the other neat thing which the game uses and that's Stress. Every time a unit commander wants the unit act they add total up how many stress points they have and roll to see how many action points they get minus that. The points can be spent on getting troops to do stuff like move, shoot, kick in doors, recover from being pinned, treat casualties and so on. Each time they roll to activate in a turn adds 1 stress, taking casualties and some other events can add more. If the activation roll modified by stress is less than 1, the unit is exhausted and stops acting for the turn. A unit can get rid of up to 3 stress points at the end of a turn, any left over gets stuck permanently so battered units become less effective over time.
I like that because it leads to a very natural feeling that units that are getting pushed too hard or are getting beaten down are made less capable, yet not incapable. You're often not acting with every model in a unit every time you activate one, meaning that there's a degree of planning involved in how the action points are used and how a unit moves, and units may not be able to get more than 1 or 2 guys shooting effectively at once.
>>44258167
Sadly one of the problems with the game. They designed this system for bigass robots to slap each other around, but it rarely gets used. You'll see some power attacks get used, throws and slams are the most used, but the game just doesn't favor them.
>>44256987
Another one, but smaller is Dark Age having the opponent roll the to wound roll for you. Its technically an armor save, but its the to wound roll for the game system.
![muster_of_rohan[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/pZzbDdy.jpg "muster_of_rohan[1].jpg")
>>44257349
Not really innovative, but the simultaneous IGOUGO turns were pretty good to break the monotony of the alternate turns system. And this was in the early 2000s, this was amazing back then.
>>44256662
Infinities active-reactive turn order, the over/under dice rolling system, and its order based activations
>when your opponent moves a model you get to choose from a number of options to react to to it moving including shooting
>you take abase state, apply mods for rang bands, cover, and other factores and need to roll under the modified value, rolling exactly the modified value is a critical and with an attack will bypass armor.
> most models (excluding drone remotes and such) generate an order which is either regular, irregular, impetuous extremely impetuous, or an LT order. Regular orders can be spent it any combination on any unit in the army
>>44259900
I still love the idea of it for larger games. Fucking Warhammer should've used it before it died.
Gears of War is a board game, but I really like the way it handles movement, shooting LoS/ranges, and cover. Zones, for the most part, with fixed cover spots behind walls.
Not something for every game, but for a dungeoncrawl/guncrawl game, there's some neat bits to steal.
I also like the face-to-face diceroll mechanic of Infinity.
Here's a neat little, attractively edited tutorials, just shy of 3 minutes, for those that wonder how it works.
https://youtu.be/RUMTSj3EHPA
>>44260156
>>44261584
Second for Infinity's Face-to-Face/Action-Reaction/Facing combo. It really does make it a fast-paced, tactical game and allows for various dirty tricks.
Speaking of dirty tricks, invisible units actually being sorta invisible.
>>44261584
Huh, weird system.
Speaking of roll offs, what are people's preferred ways of player interaction? Do you like the more direct interaction, things like Infinity's system; or a more passive system, like Dark Age or Warhammer's armor saves? I can see the benefits of both.
Roll offs tend to be more involved, but at the same time can be more cumbersome. That video for Infinity shows that with the example they show; have to roll under, but the highest rolling under wins, in a blackjack kind of way of rolling highest without busting.
While the passive is a little slower and less fully engaging, but the system can be less cumbersome. Warhammer has set numbers you have to roll for the most part. Dark Age uses some math, but its still mostly roll against the stat.
ye olde warhammer 40k's close combat mechanics. Unless I'm mistaken Necromunda uses it as well.
Convoluted as hell for a squad-based wargame until you get all the tables memorized, but it's still my favorite close combat system. Gives sergeants a reason to use a sword, too.
>>44257244
>Xwing has some interesting things.
>Maneuver templates being one. Having players put down their moves all at once without seeing what the other guys does first (barring abilities and such) is pretty neat and leads to some shenanigans.
Nothing new about that - space combat games and naval games have been doing that forever.
>>44263571
Aye, and it works so much better in Necromunda. If a close combat has more than 3 combatants at any one time, something has gone horribly wrong somewhere.
It's also a lot less convoluted that way. Less stuff to keep in mind.
>>44256662
Gonna go OT but is there a simple DIY method of making scenery like this? Even just basic cuboids and cylinders?
/Really/ basic stuff but I like that Flames of War does armour facing as a straight line across the vehicle. Much less "It's within 60*!" "No it's more like 70!" stuff. Everyone knows what a straight line looks like by-eye.
>>44258171
I'm working on something that rips off No End in Sight, FiveCore, Infinity and a few others. There would be several types of troops that can have some amount of orders, which they could generally spend only on themselves. One troop would be designated as team leader, with special skill allowing to pool the orders. Aside from orders given by troops, there would be direct orders, which would require beating a roll of d6 dependent on number of troops under your command and your Stress level. There would also be a special type of order just for decreasing stress. The idea is that in one turn you badly want to get to some objective so you overextend your forces and in the next turn you hunker down, recover, and go on defensive. High amount of Stress would be detrimental, for example resulting in worse pinning tests, or kill dice transforming into shock dice. I'm monitoring this thread for cool ideas to incorporate into my thing
>>44264146
Go over to the Delta Vector blog (4chan hates the link because blogspot) and read every single one of the 61 (it keeps growing) game design articles.
Whilst it won't tell you how to build a complete game, it goes into great detail about the different aspects of game mechanics, why they're used, what they effect and so on.
>>44264461
THANK YOU. I've been looking for wargame design resources, but there's practically nothing out there. I'll have to read through it.
>>44260309
The amount of good ideas in LOTR that failed to migrate into 40k/WHFB is stunning.
>inb4 durp durp, contract said whut?
Because GW isn't the goddamn world champions at filing off serial numbers?
>*Throws away Dune, Paradise Lost
>>44265127
I'm pretty sure the contract had nothing to do with the rules, the whole LOTR side of things was handled by a separate team than the core games, so you didn't see any bleed into the other games. Which is a shame.
>>44264461
Reading though his posts. So far, they've been good.
