The Arkentool War OOC Thread - Signups, Suggestions, etc.

Your new games, homebrews, mods and ideas. Forum games go here.

The Arkentool War OOC Thread - Signups, Suggestions, etc.

Postby WaterMonkey314 » Wed Feb 02, 2011 10:27 pm

Since the Erfwican game seems to have died and BLAND's Battle for Mine Island has yet to get off the ground, I thought I'd try to revive the forum by proposing a TBfGK-style campaign game.

I understand that last time I tried this, I... well, I had the wrong objectives in mind. :oops: I've learned from that, and this game, should it happen, will not involve GM demon ex machinas. :)

Anyway, I'm just interested to see how many and who would be interested. The game will use either the Oddworld rules or the original Battle for ____ set (perhaps with some modifications). I plan to allow players to drop-in/out, which would also allow us to upgrade rulesets should we decide to.

There will be both short-term challenges (neighborhood of 1-2 turns to address); medium-term ones (3-7); and an overarching storyline. Gameplay will be mostly tactical, like always - but I plan to introduce some ... different elements to make it less dreary.

What do you guys think? (Oh, and I may want a second GM to help me plan things out and run things. If this really takes off, I may move to a New Erf-style decentralized, redundant system to ensure that GM absence doesn't kill the game.)
Last edited by WaterMonkey314 on Tue Apr 12, 2011 10:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
WaterMonkey314
 
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 9:40 pm

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby Sihoiba » Thu Feb 03, 2011 7:17 am

I would probably be interested. Would like to see the Battle for Two Cities pick up the pace again as well.
Sihoiba
 
Posts: 584
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 12:50 pm

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby tigerusthegreat » Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:19 pm

I'll play. I've been interested in erf-style gaming for a while, but this is (obviously) my first foray into these forums. Reading through various rules, sounds interesting (though I doubt I'd make a good Chief Warlord due to poor rule knowledge).
Prehendo Victoria - My first erfworld story. Comment thread

Last Updated 4/09/2014

Imperial Destiny (My Science Fiction Story) Updated 4/09/2014 (link is to first page)
tigerusthegreat
 
Posts: 468
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:17 pm

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby Stryke » Wed Mar 02, 2011 3:23 pm

I'd be inerested, any chance you could post a link to the rules your going to use first though.
Stryke
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 6:59 pm

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby BLANDCorporatio » Wed Mar 02, 2011 3:50 pm

Sihoiba wrote:I would probably be interested. Would like to see the Battle for Two Cities pick up the pace again as well.


So would I, if only to see the scenario finished. We got pretty slaughtered there, but not yet eliminated.
The whole point of this is lost if you keep it a secret.
User avatar
BLANDCorporatio
Tool + YOTD Supporter!
Tool + YOTD Supporter!
 
Posts: 3446
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 5:24 am

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby 333 » Wed Mar 02, 2011 6:40 pm

I'd be interested. I've been wanting to be in a Erf game for a while, but never really decided to join one lol. So, if this happens, sign me up!
333
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:32 pm

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby WaterMonkey314 » Wed Mar 02, 2011 10:30 pm

I was thinking about using the Oddworld rules from BLAND's game (the about-to-start Battle for Mine Island).

We can either start now or wait for that to get going and see how the rules work. Either way, I plan to allow for players to drop in or out, and even for entire ruleset upgrades if needed! Four people is probably enough to get started, though I'd like to see maybe a vet or two more (looks at BLAND) to help you new guys out.
WaterMonkey314
 
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 9:40 pm

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby HerbieRai » Thu Mar 03, 2011 9:10 am

I'd like to watch for the opening bit, but I'd be willing to be a backup if someone drops.
HerbieRai
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 1:58 pm

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby tigerusthegreat » Thu Mar 03, 2011 10:06 am

I'm interested in starting now, regardless of my experience.
Prehendo Victoria - My first erfworld story. Comment thread

Last Updated 4/09/2014

Imperial Destiny (My Science Fiction Story) Updated 4/09/2014 (link is to first page)
tigerusthegreat
 
Posts: 468
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:17 pm

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby BLANDCorporatio » Thu Mar 03, 2011 10:34 am

WaterMonkey314 wrote:We can either start now or wait for that to get going and see how the rules work. Either way, I plan to allow for players to drop in or out, and even for entire ruleset upgrades if needed!


Funny you should mention that, I was thinking of a minor tweak these past few days. :)

WaterMonkey314 wrote:Four people is probably enough to get started, though I'd like to see maybe a vet or two more (looks at BLAND) to help you new guys out.


M? What should I do?
The whole point of this is lost if you keep it a secret.
User avatar
BLANDCorporatio
Tool + YOTD Supporter!
Tool + YOTD Supporter!
 
Posts: 3446
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 5:24 am

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby WaterMonkey314 » Thu Mar 03, 2011 10:38 am

BLANDCorporatio wrote:
WaterMonkey314 wrote:We can either start now or wait for that to get going and see how the rules work. Either way, I plan to allow for players to drop in or out, and even for entire ruleset upgrades if needed!


Funny you should mention that, I was thinking of a minor tweak these past few days. :)

WaterMonkey314 wrote:Four people is probably enough to get started, though I'd like to see maybe a vet or two more (looks at BLAND) to help you new guys out.


M? What should I do?


Join? :D (You didn't explicitly say if you were or not joining... :P )
WaterMonkey314
 
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 9:40 pm

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby BLANDCorporatio » Thu Mar 03, 2011 11:05 am

Lol, ok :)
The whole point of this is lost if you keep it a secret.
User avatar
BLANDCorporatio
Tool + YOTD Supporter!
Tool + YOTD Supporter!
 
Posts: 3446
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 5:24 am

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby tigerusthegreat » Thu Mar 03, 2011 12:32 pm

dibs on tigews and other feline units
Prehendo Victoria - My first erfworld story. Comment thread

Last Updated 4/09/2014

Imperial Destiny (My Science Fiction Story) Updated 4/09/2014 (link is to first page)
tigerusthegreat
 
Posts: 468
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:17 pm

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby WaterMonkey314 » Sat Mar 05, 2011 10:51 pm

I'll go ahead and start working on a final set of rules... hopefully we can get this off the ground soon. :D
WaterMonkey314
 
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 9:40 pm

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby WaterMonkey314 » Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:06 am

Main Ruleset Doc

Main ruleset is up!

Two key changes:
Attackers may now attack multiple times per turn. The fatigue penalty applies to further attacks, though. (The dropoff has also been reduced from .5 to .75 per attack, so stacks tire less quickly).

Max move is now 10. I want bigger maps with more room to maneuver (though BLAND's latest map is quite nice even with a max move of 5. I may or may not cut move costs as well.
WaterMonkey314
 
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 9:40 pm

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby tigerusthegreat » Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:19 am

Teams?

Also how needlessly complicated would it be to have more than 2 sides.
Prehendo Victoria - My first erfworld story. Comment thread

Last Updated 4/09/2014

Imperial Destiny (My Science Fiction Story) Updated 4/09/2014 (link is to first page)
tigerusthegreat
 
Posts: 468
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:17 pm

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby BLANDCorporatio » Sun Mar 06, 2011 6:30 am

WaterMonkey314 wrote:Main Ruleset Doc

Main ruleset is up!


I like it! Esp. the structuring of some paragraphs makes some basic concepts (wilful attack, maneuver to avoid etc) more legible.

I notice this is Oddworld, with a few things spiced up (more wilful attacks, more move). Recent experience suggests two changes to unit cost formulas:

- certain specials are dependent on Attack for their cost. Therefore, only units with Attack at least 1 are able to have them. Also, in general, a unit whose stats result in a special to cost 0 should not be able to get that special.

- most special costs depend on Hits. This is to enforce a "unit is better than something twice its hits" principle. The problem occurs in the min-Hit unit region- who's better than a 3H unit, if it's the minimum of Hits? To alleviate this, I suggest that in all specials with costs that depend on Hits, replace Hits by Hits_Adj = max(Hits, 6). Or, Hits_Adj = max(Hits, Min_Hits*2), whatever Min_Hits (minimum Hits that a unit can have) is.

tigerusthegreat wrote:Also how needlessly complicated would it be to have more than 2 sides.


No complication, rules-wise. From the start, Oddworld rules (which these are based on) were thought to handle scenarios with however many player sides- actual, different turn-taking, sides, and not just allied factions forming two teams.
The whole point of this is lost if you keep it a secret.
User avatar
BLANDCorporatio
Tool + YOTD Supporter!
Tool + YOTD Supporter!
 
Posts: 3446
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 5:24 am

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby Nihila » Sun Mar 06, 2011 9:24 am

I might be interested in this. The rule modifications look very interesting, I'll see what I can do with them. :twisted:
"The Infantrymen of Erfworld have nothing to lose but their chains. They have Erfworld to win. Infantry of all sides: Unite!"--Kawl Mawx, Master-class Moneymancer
Nihila
 
Posts: 750
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 5:09 pm
Location: Probably totally lost.

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby BLANDCorporatio » Sun Mar 06, 2011 9:31 am

Didn't check the Scouting cost for the new proposed rules. The idea is that the cost in basic scouts* to scout a 10hex-radius area should be as large as the cost for someone to "surprise" the scouts (deliver units to the center of the 10hex radius area, from outside this area, and those units would total the scouts' Hits).

*: which may be "impossible" units with 1H, seeing as how min-H is 3

There may be another problem with multiple wilful attacks- can a stack attack the same opponents immediately after a battle, for example.
The whole point of this is lost if you keep it a secret.
User avatar
BLANDCorporatio
Tool + YOTD Supporter!
Tool + YOTD Supporter!
 
Posts: 3446
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 5:24 am

Re: Any interest in a GMd Campaign-Style Battle for ____ game?

Postby WaterMonkey314 » Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:36 pm

tigerusthegreat wrote:Teams?

Also how needlessly complicated would it be to have more than 2 sides.


Er... that's leftover language from the Oddworld rules. Since it's a GMd campaign, I was really thinking more along the lines of "everyone vs. me". :P We can have multiple teams though if you guys really want - I'll figure out a way for that to happen at some point.

BLANDCorporatio wrote:
WaterMonkey314 wrote:Main Ruleset Doc

Main ruleset is up!


I like it! Esp. the structuring of some paragraphs makes some basic concepts (wilful attack, maneuver to avoid etc) more legible.

I notice this is Oddworld, with a few things spiced up (more wilful attacks, more move). Recent experience suggests two changes to unit cost formulas:

- certain specials are dependent on Attack for their cost. Therefore, only units with Attack at least 1 are able to have them. Also, in general, a unit whose stats result in a special to cost 0 should not be able to get that special.

- most special costs depend on Hits. This is to enforce a "unit is better than something twice its hits" principle. The problem occurs in the min-Hit unit region- who's better than a 3H unit, if it's the minimum of Hits? To alleviate this, I suggest that in all specials with costs that depend on Hits, replace Hits by Hits_Adj = max(Hits, 6). Or, Hits_Adj = max(Hits, Min_Hits*2), whatever Min_Hits (minimum Hits that a unit can have) is.


-re Atk-dependent specials: I don't see much of a problem with "vestigial" specials - I'll just toss them out. With the exception of Dance-fighting, having any of those specials with an attack of 0 is the same as not having them at all. Dance-fighting might need that correction, though - I think I'll add a minimum attack of 1 to get Dance-Fighting.

-re Hits-dependent specials: I think the multiple-willful-attack change will shift the balance back towards large units. A large stack that can 1-hit KO a smaller stack can just power through the minions, which will lead to major carnage (maybe). We'll test this soon - very soon. :D

BLANDCorporatio wrote:Didn't check the Scouting cost for the new proposed rules. The idea is that the cost in basic scouts* to scout a 10hex-radius area should be as large as the cost for someone to "surprise" the scouts (deliver units to the center of the 10hex radius area, from outside this area, and those units would total the scouts' Hits).

*: which may be "impossible" units with 1H, seeing as how min-H is 3

There may be another problem with multiple wilful attacks- can a stack attack the same opponents immediately after a battle, for example.

-re Scouting costs: I hadn't realized that Scout wasn't move-dependent. A move 10 scout would be rather OP and disadvantage anyone trying to sneak units in by relay (aka me, the GM :P ). What do you think about making Scout cost 7*Hits or 7*Hits*(Move-4)*(Move-4), whichever is higher? That way, a move 5 scout would cost the same - but higher-move scouts would become progressively more expensive.

-re attacking again: I'm inclined to say a stack cannot willfully attack the same stack twice in a turn. Again, we'll try this out and see how it works. (Or maybe the fatigue penalty is doubled if it tries that.)
WaterMonkey314
 
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 9:40 pm

Next

Return to Your Games

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests