Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 11

Author Topic: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine  (Read 11776 times)

inaluct

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #45 on: June 10, 2009, 06:51:19 pm »

Wate, is this complete enough to make armies? :O
Logged

Org

  • Bay Watcher
  • Daring Hero
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #46 on: June 10, 2009, 06:53:57 pm »

No. I have ideas.

I probably should have said that.

Logged

Org

  • Bay Watcher
  • Daring Hero
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #47 on: June 10, 2009, 07:06:49 pm »

Wate, is this complete enough to make armies? :O
Do you wish to add something?
Logged

inaluct

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #48 on: June 10, 2009, 07:09:28 pm »

Well, I'm going to make an army once this is done.
Logged

Org

  • Bay Watcher
  • Daring Hero
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #49 on: June 10, 2009, 07:13:07 pm »

Ahh...

If I may ask, what idea for your army do you have?
Logged

inaluct

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #50 on: June 10, 2009, 11:21:38 pm »

Ogre Liberation Task Force.

No longer will the mighty ogres bow their heads in submission to the puny shortlings.
Logged

Earthquake Damage

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #51 on: June 11, 2009, 04:46:26 am »

OP

I recommend you check out the Steel Panthers series (PC wargames;  SP: World at War is free and thus the only one I've played -- check the Matrix Games website).  There are a lot of good ideas there, many of which I haven't encountered in other games (I'm not much of a wargamer, admittedly, so take that for what it's worth).  Could be a good source of inspiration for some of your game mechanics, despite not being tabletop games.

It's turn-based, yet they make some effort to solve the "you go, we go" mechanic.  Of note are their artillery/air strike and op-fire systems.  Good idea fuel, I reckon.
Logged

Aqizzar

  • Bay Watcher
  • There is no 'U'.
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #52 on: June 11, 2009, 06:24:38 am »

Okay, I've finally had the flash of inspiration I've been waiting for.  At last, a stat comparison system!

All models have a stat line, whose numbers are fixed as one would expect.  Attacks, armor, and other special stuff adds die-rolls to these fixed numbers when actions compare them.  Allow me to demonstrate with a completely hypothetical scenario with hypothetical placeholder stats.

Two identical cavemen, Uhg-A and Uhg-B, are battling (there can be only one Uhg!).  Both wear the same hide armor and carry matching clubs.  First, they have to actually engage each other in combat - this a function I'll work out later (Initiative and so forth).  For argument's sake, Uhg-A strikes first.  His basic Weapon Skill is 5, and his club offers a to-hit roll of +1D6.  Uhg-B's basic Agility is 5, and his light hide armor allows a +1D6 roll for dodging (you can see where I'm going with this).  Uhg-A connects, and rolls to wound Uhg-B.  Uhg-A hits with Strength 5, and his wooden stick rolls a +1D6 when smacking people.  Uhg-B wears some thick hide, adding +1D6 to his 5 of Toughness, and yeah you get the idea.

With this caveman example, let me stress a very important point.  The system, as I envision it, makes absolutely no distinction between technologies, eras, or origins.  For the purposes of balancing and model cost, it is the effect, and only the effect, that matters, not the explanation.  If you make a unit of sling-swinging hobbits and say they do the same damage as riflemen, other players would be perfectly entitled to make fun of you, but as long as you pay the commiserate cost of rifle-like damage, you can say it's because they throw rocks at the speed of sound, and the system itself will not care one iota.

Back on point, the bonus rolls for "equipment" (explanations are meaningless) go up or down to represent various kinds of attacks or defenses, and also interact with the target's options.  Examples:  A buzzsaw would have a high Strength bonus for cutting through armor, but a very low Skill bonus because it's clumsy.  A flamethrower would have relatively low Strength, but it's fan would downgrade the target's Agility bonus.  A bulky suit of armor would have a high Toughness bonus, but add little to Agility.  A very hard suit of armor would possibly degrade the weapon's Strength bonus or divide it's basic Strength, as it's designed to withstand direct blows.  I'm picturing a large table of Weapon and Armor types and their respective interactions with each other.  And of course, some weapons (like guns) will have their own basic Strength independent of the model that carries it.

It also bears mentioning that these bonus rolls will all be D6's, D3's, D8's, and so on.  As there's no physical table or models, any random numbers needed could really be of any possible range, but I think for nerd-dom's sake if nothing else I'd like to adhere to the Platonic polyhedrals.

So I still need to think through and devise the whole squad-logic-initiative-morale thing, and a weapon design system, and armor types, and a terrain system.  But at least I've got the basic stat-use-comparison matrix hammered into place.  Although no real stats to plug into it yet.  Anyway, there you go.  Thoughts?
Logged
And here is where my beef pops up like a looming awkward boner.
Please amplify your relaxed states.
Quote from: PTTG??
The ancients built these quote pyramids to forever store vast quantities of rage.

Il Palazzo

  • Bay Watcher
  • And lo, the Dude did abide. And it was good.
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #53 on: June 11, 2009, 06:53:42 am »

It also bears mentioning that these bonus rolls will all be D6's, D3's, D8's, and so on.  As there's no physical table or models, any random numbers needed could really be of any possible range, but I think for nerd-dom's sake if nothing else I'd like to adhere to the Platonic polyhedrals.
Even Plato could not possibly imagine D3 polyhedral.
(Yes, I'm just being obnoxious)
Logged

Aqizzar

  • Bay Watcher
  • There is no 'U'.
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #54 on: June 11, 2009, 06:57:39 am »

Even Plato could not possibly imagine D3 polyhedral.
(Yes, I'm just being obnoxious)

Congratulations, I mentioned it for exactly that reason.

I'm trying to picture a trihedron, and I'm completely failing.  It just doesn't work...
Logged
And here is where my beef pops up like a looming awkward boner.
Please amplify your relaxed states.
Quote from: PTTG??
The ancients built these quote pyramids to forever store vast quantities of rage.

Org

  • Bay Watcher
  • Daring Hero
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #55 on: June 11, 2009, 08:28:15 am »

Okay, I've finally had the flash of inspiration I've been waiting for.  At last, a stat comparison system!

All models have a stat line, whose numbers are fixed as one would expect.  Attacks, armor, and other special stuff adds die-rolls to these fixed numbers when actions compare them.  Allow me to demonstrate with a completely hypothetical scenario with hypothetical placeholder stats.

Two identical cavemen, Uhg-A and Uhg-B, are battling (there can be only one Uhg!).  Both wear the same hide armor and carry matching clubs.  First, they have to actually engage each other in combat - this a function I'll work out later (Initiative and so forth).  For argument's sake, Uhg-A strikes first.  His basic Weapon Skill is 5, and his club offers a to-hit roll of +1D6.  Uhg-B's basic Agility is 5, and his light hide armor allows a +1D6 roll for dodging (you can see where I'm going with this).  Uhg-A connects, and rolls to wound Uhg-B.  Uhg-A hits with Strength 5, and his wooden stick rolls a +1D6 when smacking people.  Uhg-B wears some thick hide, adding +1D6 to his 5 of Toughness, and yeah you get the idea.

With this caveman example, let me stress a very important point.  The system, as I envision it, makes absolutely no distinction between technologies, eras, or origins.  For the purposes of balancing and model cost, it is the effect, and only the effect, that matters, not the explanation.  If you make a unit of sling-swinging hobbits and say they do the same damage as riflemen, other players would be perfectly entitled to make fun of you, but as long as you pay the commiserate cost of rifle-like damage, you can say it's because they throw rocks at the speed of sound, and the system itself will not care one iota.

Back on point, the bonus rolls for "equipment" (explanations are meaningless) go up or down to represent various kinds of attacks or defenses, and also interact with the target's options.  Examples:  A buzzsaw would have a high Strength bonus for cutting through armor, but a very low Skill bonus because it's clumsy.  A flamethrower would have relatively low Strength, but it's fan would downgrade the target's Agility bonus.  A bulky suit of armor would have a high Toughness bonus, but add little to Agility.  A very hard suit of armor would possibly degrade the weapon's Strength bonus or divide it's basic Strength, as it's designed to withstand direct blows.  I'm picturing a large table of Weapon and Armor types and their respective interactions with each other.  And of course, some weapons (like guns) will have their own basic Strength independent of the model that carries it.

It also bears mentioning that these bonus rolls will all be D6's, D3's, D8's, and so on.  As there's no physical table or models, any random numbers needed could really be of any possible range, but I think for nerd-dom's sake if nothing else I'd like to adhere to the Platonic polyhedrals.

So I still need to think through and devise the whole squad-logic-initiative-morale thing, and a weapon design system, and armor types, and a terrain system.  But at least I've got the basic stat-use-comparison matrix hammered into place.  Although no real stats to plug into it yet.  Anyway, there you go.  Thoughts?
My god.
Wall of text. But that was amazing.
And 1d3 uses a d6 as most of you know.
I think you guys are being sarcastic...

And I didn't understand the fan on a flamethrower thing. Why would it lower the enemies agility?
Logged

Aqizzar

  • Bay Watcher
  • There is no 'U'.
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #56 on: June 11, 2009, 09:21:35 am »

Because you're shooting a gout of fire at the target.  As long as the fan of flame can actually reach them, it'll probably hit no matter what, so a flamethrower type weapon would largely negate the Agility of the target.  So it's most useful against nimble opponents.

And of course a D3 is just a D6 reduced to thirds.  I threw it in there to see if anyone would catch it.
Logged
And here is where my beef pops up like a looming awkward boner.
Please amplify your relaxed states.
Quote from: PTTG??
The ancients built these quote pyramids to forever store vast quantities of rage.

Boksi

  • Bay Watcher
  • Everyone's dumb in their own special way
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #57 on: June 11, 2009, 09:22:06 am »

It has a wider spread. It fans over a large area, you see.
Logged
[BODY_DETAIL:NAIL:NAIL:NAIL]
[HAMMER:HAMMER:HAMMER]

[TSU_NOUN:nose]
[SUN_TSU_NOUN:art:war]

Org

  • Bay Watcher
  • Daring Hero
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #58 on: June 11, 2009, 09:23:47 am »

Okay.

What about having two weapons Aqizzar? Will that be like GW Games in the sense of +1 Attack, or +d6 strength or so?
Logged

Aqizzar

  • Bay Watcher
  • There is no 'U'.
    • View Profile
Re: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine
« Reply #59 on: June 11, 2009, 09:38:14 am »

Beats me!  No really, I've thought about that, but I don't have a good answer yet.  I'm specifically trying not to ape Warhammer, but there's no denying the difference between hitting someone really hard and hitting a bunch of guys in succession.  There has to be accounting for that.

When talking about "weapons", I say again that there is no distinction between swords or teeth or a malignant aura.  "Weapon" is just a convenient term for any distinct option a model has for doing damage with.  Obviously that includes a buyable option for multiple attacks.

It works like this.  You design the basic model (say, a Dwarf).  Then you design different "weapons" (like a pair of axes, an uzi, and a headbutt).  Then you design different "armors" (like a suit of platemail, a forcefield, and a booze stench).  Then you design the units themselves, made of models, weapons, armors, and miscellaneous options.  I guess a model could have as many "weapons" as you want to load on him, but you can only use one at a time.  And the point-value calculation will algorithmically make a unit more expense by the variability and power of options it has.  Armor is a bit trickier - maybe armors can be designed in layers, so you can make platemail and forcefields, and some models might be given one, the other, or both, but not multiples on the same layer.
Logged
And here is where my beef pops up like a looming awkward boner.
Please amplify your relaxed states.
Quote from: PTTG??
The ancients built these quote pyramids to forever store vast quantities of rage.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 11