tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9140646711960604590.post864099270099953884..comments2024-03-27T12:37:27.837-07:00Comments on Tim's Miniature Wargaming Blog: Vive la Resistancetimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09928949644765765070noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9140646711960604590.post-71176530351025468012008-04-30T00:43:00.000-07:002008-04-30T00:43:00.000-07:00Thx for the writeup. I enjoy reading about your ga...Thx for the writeup. I enjoy reading about your games.<BR/><BR/>If you really want easier shaken but harder to take out, you could:<BR/><BR/>* Lower the toughness so they become shaken more easily.<BR/><BR/>* 1 raise becomes "surpressed" instead of the normal "Out of Fight". They must pass a morale test with a raise to return to the fight. Otherwise they stay where they are and will only engage in hand to hand combat if assaulted.<BR/><BR/>* 2 raises means "Out of Fight"<BR/><BR/>What do you think?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9140646711960604590.post-27684299863721887282008-04-14T14:18:00.000-07:002008-04-14T14:18:00.000-07:00Good idea...Yeah what's with you and Gary - play a...Good idea...<BR/><BR/>Yeah what's with you and Gary - play a game once and you both want to totally rewrite the rules....timhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09928949644765765070noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9140646711960604590.post-27812603357984818972008-04-14T14:15:00.000-07:002008-04-14T14:15:00.000-07:00hmmmm - good point.Maybe what is needed is to make...hmmmm - good point.<BR/><BR/>Maybe what is needed is to make wounding harder, shaking easier, and put your idea about losses as well as shakes causing morale checks. I think that this would have two overall effects, one good, one bad. The good is that it would lead to less decisive firefights with morale being the critical factor, which IMHO would be a bit more "realistic". OTOH, it would make for some looooong games.<BR/><BR/>Looking at it as a whole, however, perhaps I should ease off on trying to re-write the rules until I have played it at least, say, twice.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9140646711960604590.post-50710390098602954042008-04-14T13:36:00.000-07:002008-04-14T13:36:00.000-07:00Of course - as a rule when ever I'm introducing so...Of course - as a rule when ever I'm introducing some one to a new game I let them win - gets them pumped about the game and interested in coming back and trying it again. In game two I will utterly CRUSH you - just so you know were you really stand... <BR/><BR/>Keeping track of wounds of individual soldiers?! Aye-yi-yi!? I think that would bog the game down considerably. I tend to think of "wounded" or "K.O.ed" a little abstractly - guys removed from teh table top aren't necessarily dead, or even seriously injured, but may have just been clipped - the sort of thing those made of sterner stuff (i.e. "Wildcards" in this game) would fight on through. I imagine it could also include those who are completely untouched but have had one to many close calls and have just given up and left!<BR/><BR/>I've been thinking about making morale a bigger factor in the game (see previous notes on <A HREF="http://saskminigamer.blogspot.com/2008/03/couple-new-house-rules-for-savage.html" REL="nofollow">Retreat and Surrender</A>) and a couple other things I was considering were we could have units take moral tests every time a unit member is K.O.ed... or have them take tests when 25% or more have been either K.O.ed OR shaken during a single initiative card....? perhaps after a failed morale test units could gain a level of fatigue (i.e. all members of the unit would be -1 to ALL of their actions for the rest of the game, a second failure would be -2, a third, if there was anyone left, would mean they're broken and leave the table....?). <BR/><BR/>cheers,<BR/><BR/>timtimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09928949644765765070noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9140646711960604590.post-40643934142483480262008-04-13T18:44:00.000-07:002008-04-13T18:44:00.000-07:00Christian here. For the record, this scenario was...Christian here. For the record, this scenario was a great time, though I think for the next one Tim will have something nastier in store for Gary and I.<BR/>I wonder if we would get more 'realistic' combat if we did a couple of changes. I think troops are way too easy to kill. I think about 3 wounds for a standard trooper would be about right. The key to this would be to make it harder to wound, but way easier to shake. Say that a hit that does not wound but comes close enough - within 2 or so - causes the guy to suffer to hit penalties, etc. The idea again being that it is fairly easy to shake / suppress / break, but harder to kill. <BR/>The key would be that each unit would have to take morale checks when enough troops were shaken, not just dead. This would allow units to become suppressed way easier, and actually make firefights go faster. Morale becomes the determining factor, not necessarily numbers and total firepower.<BR/>Just an idea.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com