From: Thomas Barclay <Thomas.Barclay@s...>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 12:35:38 -0400
Subject: FMA Combat Movement
Much has been written on this lately. There is a problem with using deterministic movement in an infantry combat game - it poorly models reality. Regardless of what one might think, movement rates in combat are widely variable. When it comes to a close assault, even members of a unit can be quite variable. The Lt. orders you up, and Pvt. McPike was busy changing mags or trying to scratch an itch. So he's a little slow off the ground. Plus he's heavy set, and spools up to combat jog a little more slowly. Whereas Pvt. McPoke is a real go getter. He anticipated and was moving before the Lt. ordered things, and his adrenalin is torqued up, so he sprints like Ben Johnson on steroids for the enemy positions. Hence quite a difference in individual movement. In Stargrunt, we allow a unit to close assault as a unit, despite the fact troops tend to arrive at enemy positions at "varying" times. Within the granularity of time in SG2, this is probably fair. In FMA Skirmish, the time granularity is smaller (as is distance). So these lags should be visible too. In this case, that translates to the "combat move". It isn't quite the same set of slow ups (the sgt. getting you all pointed in the same direction, your guys guys not moving at the same time, etc. etc.), but it rather reflects the uncertainties of combat. You get up to go... maybe you hesitate because of nerves. Maybe you stumble on a root or stone as you start to run. Maybe somewhere a flying bullet (combat happens in a continous fashion, not the digital on-off of turns in a game) scare you so you flinch down and that slows your run, or you dodge a bit. Maybe the path you initially chose had to be modified by terrain. Maybe your leg cramps. Maybe you are more tired than you thought and the run takes longer than you hoped. Maybe you run faster due to adrenalin. Look at it this way - if you've ever been on an excercise with the military or played paintball, you'll get a feel for the variable nature of movement. It is far more pronounced in bad terrain (hence the addition of terrain modifiers to speed), because there are exponentially more obstacles and things to get in the way or hurt you, but even on a supposedly flat field, there are gopher holes, ruts, stones, etc. Runnning on tarmac people even stumble. (You are wearing combat gear, might well be fatigued, are definitely excited, and things are happening concurrently on the battlefield - trips and stumbles happen). FMA and SG2 aren't chess. They aren't even FT where manoeuvre envelopes which are predictable (though I loved the emergency thrust rules someone wrote). They are the chaotic (though in an orderly fashion... <grin>) movements of ground troops all with differing physical fitness levels, excitement levels, and paths across variable terrain. Random factors not only make the game more interesting, but (to a point) they help model 'fog of war'. I'm all for the idea that says a combat move is 0.5 * your full move plus a dice or rolling 2 movement dice and adding. I like that better than the multiplier, because that REALLY is variable (perhaps too much so - really hard to predict) and because it tends towards a mean result (with the multiple dice) while allowing a range or results. I'm actually running SG2 games where *whenever* a die multiplier is used we roll the dice and add them - helps give more-predictable-yet-still-random-and-rife-with-possibilities results - makes scenario balance easier.