This is a test: the lines below SHOULD be aligned and show the original Weapon Table based on the D6, and the "ROUGH D10 Weapon table", with the values aproximated by using a D10.
Without a previev function, is really hard to guess what we can see after i press "Publish" ;)
Hello, Legions of Steel fans! I've just downloaded the Alternate Rules from the 3rd LoS Newsletter. I plan to use them for the Taking Back the Streets scenario, hopefully, this evening.
Hi, johnywonderful! There is a download for playtesters called New and Alternative Rules. Among other things, it has some rules to play LoS using d10 mechanics.
Speaking as a professional developer/game designer, I would recommend that the Introductory game be produced with a d6 basis, while the d10 system could be offered as an optional alternative. The GW fans are all familiar with the d6 and they could easily adapt to the game this way without having to buy new d10 dice. I don't mind going with either, but it is a little skewed when you convert d6 to d10. Also from a manufacturing POV, d6s are just so much cheeper. Just my 2 cents worth.
You make some very good points here Lembit, especially the one regarding GW fans. Let's face it, many of them can become LOS fans. Let us know which games you have worked on.
I have developed about 40 games for Against the Odds/TPS/LPS as Lead Developer for them. and assisted development with L2 Design Group's games. These have been basically all Historical Wargames. My two game designs were for Turning Point Simulations: Hastings and The Marne. I also designed a childrens game called Backyard Bug Buffet which my wife and I self published. If you Google seach my name, you will see what games I have been involved with.
all gamers (and do mean all) have different dice, d10 are as common as D6’s. Even GW uses more then D6’s. As far as game design if you bring back alien races you really want to have greater spread of numbers to avoid too much “sameness”.
Changing the die type will not hinder the game.
Also you want to avoid too many optional rules. you want everyone on same page rules wise to avoid confusion.
@johnywonderful I haven;t made my final decision yet but I have other methods of creating diversity. I actually want less different weapons and am creating Hero type characters with special abilities to create a more robust playing environment. These new hero designs will be very measured so they will be unique but not ultra powerful.
If changing the die (which I am not adverse to), then I would suggest d12s. This way there can be further distributions while being able to keep the probabilities of the original stats.
It‘s almost like an open secret in the wargames industry (or it was back in my day, lol!) that the D12 is actually the best possible die to use for table top combat. I don’t want to get into the mathematical mumbo-jumbo behind that, but it hits the “sweet spot” of variables while tables are still relatively easy to keep track of from the player’s point of view. With only a few exception’s (such as FASA’s fantasy combat game Crucible), the industry has certainly shied away from adopting it almost purely out of its lack of familiarity by the greater gaming public.
Personally, the Gamer in me with the desire to play with superior mechanics would prefer using a D12 system; while the Economic Realist in me knows the market has long-dictated the supremacy of the D6.
But all-said, if I had to vote on what primary die the ruleset should utilize, I’d actually make the compromise and go with the D10. I’m still relatively new to the game mechanics of LoS so that vote could very easily change the more I read up on things, but that’s my thoughts for now.
@craigleslie80 thanks for your comment. I have given it a lot of thought and decided to stick with the original design. For 2 other games I have designed, I also used the d6, but in a very different way from LOS or most other games.
I know that GW's formula is to charge lots of money for the special indivfidual figures. I hope that this is not the route that you plan to take Marco. It is one of things that really turns me off GW products.
I have a suggestion for the rules presentation. Use military ranks for their implementation.
So , the rules and first scenario would be titled: "Recruit Level". The rules and second scenario would be: "Private Level". Next would be "Lance Corporal Level".......
I know too. I plan on pricing at market rates, which would be less than GW. I like your ideas for the Tutorial rules and will implement. Thanks for the idea.
I like the fact that you have to plan ahead and save Lp as part of a strategy. Although you do recover them in the start phase, the problem could arise that you spend all your leadership and don't win initiative. Then you won't have it when your opponent could potentially be taking their turn.
I agree with you on these but I did a search and could not find any Segment titles, only Phase. Are you referring to the old rules or the 2nd Edition ones?
@marco I concur that the puny UNE need to plan rather than be freely given the oppertunity to to effect initiative. Long live the glorious Machine Empire!
Is this a new scenario for the 2nd Edition, or the one from the 1st edition. If it's a new one, I can't seem to find it in my playtester's package sent.
@Lembit Tohver Hello, Lembit! It's a new scenario for the 2nd edition which is still
work-in-progress, no doupt, it'll make it's way to the dropbox soon-ish? Interestingly, there is a 1st edition scenario by the same name which actually looks fun...
It's on page 60 of the 1997 LoS Rules of Engement.
Astro Knight is correct. It is actually a modified version of the original scenario, designed to work with the forces from the new 2nd edition boxed set
Here i am :) About the d10 idea, let me write down some numbers and i'll post here some probability tables to look at
WEAPON TABLE D6
Hit# (N+) | 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 :d6 Probability | 83,33% : 66,67% : 50,00% : 33,33% : 16,67% : 0,00% :ROF | Weapon |----------:----------:----------:----------:----------:----------:1 | Blaster | : 5 : 15 : 25 : 35 : 45 : Range| | - : 66,67% : 50,00% : 33,33% : 16,67% : 00,00% : Prob.1 | Deadbolt Launcher | : : 25 : 35 : 45 : 55 : Range| | - : - : 50,00% : 33,33% : 16,67% : 00,00% : Prob.2 | Plasma Projector | 2 : 5 : 10 : 15 : 20 : 25 : Range| | 97,22% : 88,89% : 75,00% : 55,56% : 30,56% : 00,00% : Prob.3 | Napalm X | : : 4 : 9 : 14 : 20 : Range| | - : - : 87,50% : 70,37% : 42,13% : 00,00% : Prob.WEAPON TABLE d10Hit# (N+) | 2 : 4 : 6 : 8 : 10 : 11 :d10 Probability | 90,00% : 70,00% : 50,00% : 30,00% : 10,00% : 0,00% :ROF | Weapon |----------:----------:----------:----------:----------:----------:1 | Blaster | : 5 : 15 : 25 : 35 : 45 : Range| | - : 70,00% : 50,00% : 30,00% : 10,00% : 0,00% : Prob.1 | Deadbolt Launcher | : : 25 : 35 : 45 : 55 : Range| | - : - : 50,00% : 30,00% : 10,00% : 0,00% : Prob.2 | Plasma Projector | 2 : 5 : 10 : 15 : 20 : 25 : Range| | 99,00% : 91,00% : 75,00% : 51,00% : 19,00% : 0,00% : Prob.3 | Napalm X | : : 4 : 9 : 14 : 20 : Range| | - : - : 87,50% : 65,70% : 27,10% : 0,00% : Prob.This is a test: the lines below SHOULD be aligned and show the original Weapon Table based on the D6, and the "ROUGH D10 Weapon table", with the values aproximated by using a D10. Without a previev function, is really hard to guess what we can see after i press "Publish" ;)
Nope :D Close, but it did'nt works well :)
Oh, well, you can take a look here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1FyRSwRrYOCJRegATd-FTzp-3jfVkJhx9QnqchBZzct8/edit?usp=sharing It is still a work in progress, but you can take a look at the first tables
Thanks Fabio. You can email me directly if you like. This is Marco.
Hello, Legions of Steel fans! I've just downloaded the Alternate Rules from the 3rd LoS Newsletter. I plan to use them for the Taking Back the Streets scenario, hopefully, this evening.
Great, thx . I look forward to your input.
What were the alternate rules?
Hi, johnywonderful! There is a download for playtesters called New and Alternative Rules. Among other things, it has some rules to play LoS using d10 mechanics.
You can sign up as a playtester on the home screen to access the updated as well as alternative rules we are playtesting.
I might have too.
I like the idea of using d10.(heck I’ll toss in the idea of using a D20, for The range of numbers you get)
Either way it Would be helpful when alien races are reintroduced.
Yes it could. I am thinking on it but have not decided yet.
Speaking as a professional developer/game designer, I would recommend that the Introductory game be produced with a d6 basis, while the d10 system could be offered as an optional alternative. The GW fans are all familiar with the d6 and they could easily adapt to the game this way without having to buy new d10 dice. I don't mind going with either, but it is a little skewed when you convert d6 to d10. Also from a manufacturing POV, d6s are just so much cheeper. Just my 2 cents worth.
You make some very good points here Lembit, especially the one regarding GW fans. Let's face it, many of them can become LOS fans. Let us know which games you have worked on.
I have developed about 40 games for Against the Odds/TPS/LPS as Lead Developer for them. and assisted development with L2 Design Group's games. These have been basically all Historical Wargames. My two game designs were for Turning Point Simulations: Hastings and The Marne. I also designed a childrens game called Backyard Bug Buffet which my wife and I self published. If you Google seach my name, you will see what games I have been involved with.
I have some pics from my first playtest game.
I would counter you point about dice.
all gamers (and do mean all) have different dice, d10 are as common as D6’s. Even GW uses more then D6’s. As far as game design if you bring back alien races you really want to have greater spread of numbers to avoid too much “sameness”.
Changing the die type will not hinder the game.
Also you want to avoid too many optional rules. you want everyone on same page rules wise to avoid confusion.
just my two cents.
Very nice paint jobs.
@johnywonderful I haven;t made my final decision yet but I have other methods of creating diversity. I actually want less different weapons and am creating Hero type characters with special abilities to create a more robust playing environment. These new hero designs will be very measured so they will be unique but not ultra powerful.
Another with the full board showing
I have the exact same plastic box to hold my LOS counters lol. I got mine over 20 years ago.
@marco Yep, it was around then that I got mine. LOL
Hi, Lembit. The two pictures of your first playtest game are terrific!
Thanks
If changing the die (which I am not adverse to), then I would suggest d12s. This way there can be further distributions while being able to keep the probabilities of the original stats.
It‘s almost like an open secret in the wargames industry (or it was back in my day, lol!) that the D12 is actually the best possible die to use for table top combat. I don’t want to get into the mathematical mumbo-jumbo behind that, but it hits the “sweet spot” of variables while tables are still relatively easy to keep track of from the player’s point of view. With only a few exception’s (such as FASA’s fantasy combat game Crucible), the industry has certainly shied away from adopting it almost purely out of its lack of familiarity by the greater gaming public.
Personally, the Gamer in me with the desire to play with superior mechanics would prefer using a D12 system; while the Economic Realist in me knows the market has long-dictated the supremacy of the D6.
But all-said, if I had to vote on what primary die the ruleset should utilize, I’d actually make the compromise and go with the D10. I’m still relatively new to the game mechanics of LoS so that vote could very easily change the more I read up on things, but that’s my thoughts for now.
@craigleslie80 thanks for your comment. I have given it a lot of thought and decided to stick with the original design. For 2 other games I have designed, I also used the d6, but in a very different way from LOS or most other games.
@marco Hey, if it ain't broke, don't fix it!
I'd be happy with LoS remaining a d6 mechanic with optional rules mechanics as suppliments.
I know that GW's formula is to charge lots of money for the special indivfidual figures. I hope that this is not the route that you plan to take Marco. It is one of things that really turns me off GW products.
I have a suggestion for the rules presentation. Use military ranks for their implementation.
So , the rules and first scenario would be titled: "Recruit Level". The rules and second scenario would be: "Private Level". Next would be "Lance Corporal Level".......
I know too. I plan on pricing at market rates, which would be less than GW. I like your ideas for the Tutorial rules and will implement. Thanks for the idea.
Leadership: Currently the Leadship Points are returned in the Start Phase. Since
Leadership Points can be used in the Initiative Segment, this means that
the Leader needs to save one (or more) points the previous turn to use
during this Segment. Also, on turn 1 he could spend all his points on initiative
(If Initiative is not designated in the Scenario rules) and then get them
immediately back. So I suggest that Leadership Points be returned at the
very start of the Initiative Segment (before rolling for Initiative) and
thus the player has the decision to make at the start of the turn if he/she
will allocate them to Initiative or save them to allocate/use for the actions
upcomming in the turn.
Secondly, I would suggest that the "Segment" titles be changed to "Phase" and the
"Phase" become "Segment". I have always viewed that a Phase consist of a number
of Segments and not the other way around.
Thirdly, there is the Action Segment and Action Phase. Keeping with the current
rule's terminology, I would suggest that you change "Action Segment" to "Activities Segment"
so that the Actions Phase is sub-section of the Activities Segment. This way you are not
using the same word for two different parts of the Sequence of play.
I like the fact that you have to plan ahead and save Lp as part of a strategy. Although you do recover them in the start phase, the problem could arise that you spend all your leadership and don't win initiative. Then you won't have it when your opponent could potentially be taking their turn.
I agree with you on these but I did a search and could not find any Segment titles, only Phase. Are you referring to the old rules or the 2nd Edition ones?
@marco I concur that the puny UNE need to plan rather than be freely given the oppertunity to to effect initiative. Long live the glorious Machine Empire!
@marco Look at the sequence of play on the charts sheet.
Happy Winter Holidays everyone!
Happy holidays to all.
Turn 5 Quater Back Sneak
Turn 6 Quater Back Sneak
Is this a new scenario for the 2nd Edition, or the one from the 1st edition. If it's a new one, I can't seem to find it in my playtester's package sent.
@Lembit Tohver Hello, Lembit! It's a new scenario for the 2nd edition which is still
work-in-progress, no doupt, it'll make it's way to the dropbox soon-ish? Interestingly, there is a 1st edition scenario by the same name which actually looks fun...
It's on page 60 of the 1997 LoS Rules of Engement.
Astro Knight is correct. It is actually a modified version of the original scenario, designed to work with the forces from the new 2nd edition boxed set