All these campaign ideas sound very exciting! I'm midway through a deep trawl
of this list's archives and the subject of campaigning seems to come up
regularly, each time with some new twist that makes me think 'Yeh!'
In the setup Claus has been talking about, I wonder if you can reduce the
'snowball' effect by giving each player a mission? Say, the Kra'vak warclan
has to collect 5000 points of human 'heads', the ESU player has to take and
hold a certain group of stars for the resources, the UNSC gains points for
every world it 'shows the flag' over (with a cruiser squadron or larger), the
FSE need two of the stars the ESU are after to link to another system, plus
don't want the UNSC poking around in one of their systems where they're
building something naughty. This could encourage shifting alliances and
generally shake things up.
Alternatively, or as well, the players are local area commanders. The
resources they accumulate, don't benefit them directly (they're admirals, not
accountants). If they need reinforcements, they have to apply to high
command who will release ships per a pre-determined table, so you may
want dreadnaughts but get sent six frigates and a corvette. There is still
scope
for the convoy raid scenario - someone orders a raider into the Oort
cloud
of a system to whack out-bound merchants and very soon your admiralty
will
be ordering a raider-sweep (bit more work for the GM to keep track of
raiders and orders sent by 'higher up'.
Regards
> David Billinghurst wrote:
> In the setup Claus has been talking about, I wonder if you can reduce
This will depend on whether they want an objective based campaign or a more
narrative one..
> Alternatively, or as well, the players are local area commanders. The
This is also a solution I will look into.. could be good at least for our
first campaign...:)
> > Alternatively, or as well, the players are local area commanders.
The
> > resources they accumulate, don't benefit them directly (they're
If the players represent regional commanders for their own "Race" and they
have a home outpost base but are getting reinforcements from their own backers
then you could introduce other dimensions into the reinforcement pool. maybe a
sucessful commander gets less reinforcements because High Command don't think
they need them or don't want a too popular commander having direct control of
too much of the warmachine. On the other hand a player that has been defeated
heavly and has their home base in danger of falling may get extra
reinforcements to represent High Commands concern about losing their presence
in the area.
***
If the players represent regional commanders for their own "Race" and they
have a home outpost base but are getting reinforcements from their own backers
then you could introduce other dimensions into the reinforcement pool. maybe a
sucessful commander gets less reinforcements because High Command don't think
they need them or don't want a too popular commander having direct control of
too much of the warmachine. On the other hand a player that has been defeated
heavly and has their home base in danger of falling may get extra
reinforcements to represent High Commands concern about losing their presence
in the area.
***
Before someone else points it out, 1st ed Imperium had a 'glory index' that
indicated how much support the vilani player could get from the supreme
command. I think there was a danger of doing TOO well.
I know Dunnigan had trouble with something similar in BattleFleet Mars that
Simenson had crafted, if I remember dramatis personas correctly.
On a different note, my system fourway campaign design had simplistic (TSR's
Buck Rogers board game) orbital mechanics that meant that allies, on opposite
sides of the outer orbital ring, had enemies 'to the right and left of them.'
Ganging up should have meant draining 'borders' to the other enemy.
Never did get it going properly, but thought it had potential.
The_Beast
> Simenson had crafted, if I remember dramatis personas correctly.
*ahem* Personae...
The_Beast
> > Alternatively, or as well, the players are local area commanders.
The
> > resources they accumulate, don't benefit them directly (they're
The campaign system for The Sword and the Flame has an ingenious method of
dealing with this. Each player is both a British minister *and* a native
ruler. If I'm the Prince of Siam and the Tommies are really pounding on me,
then in my persona as MP, I'm going to vote to send troops to Abyssinia, not
Siam.
Music to my ears!
If you like I'll try to put together some notes on the two 'campaigns' I
tried to work up for Buck Rogers system. One already mentioned, one for
planetary assault. Mainly, I have to crank out the PSB I was going use to
cover the awkward parts. ;->=
I haven't said all this before, have I?
I'm assuming you can handle Visio files.
Might give you a few chuckles, and I hope an idea or two.
The_Beast
Nyrath wrote on 11/01/2005 06:36:28 PM:
> Doug Evans wrote:
> From: Nyrath the nearly wise <nyrathwiz@comcast.net>
Nope I don't think it works like that.
If player 2 is between player 1 and 3 and opposite player 4 as son as player 2
moves to attacker player 4 they weaken their fleet facing players 1 and 3 who
promptly attack player 2. They don't need to weaken their borders against
player 4 becaus player 2 will already have withdrawn units for the attack
against player 4.
Player 4 will already have 1 war going against player 2 and mostly won't want
to rock the boat by attacking player 1 or 3.
Nett result player 2 gets eaten and players 1 and 3 get most of player 2's
territory. Players 1 and 3 are now much more powerful than player 4 so that
player will be next.
The 4 player map with everyone bordering each other is the sure way to
guarantee peace or limit confilt to low intensity fights. No one can risk the
loss of fleet assetts a big battle could result in.
even if you mutually destroy one opponent you are vulnerable to the other 2.
> Nope I don't think it works like that.
Absolutely, though borders isn't really an appropriate phrase in this case. I
had a few 'first conditions' to get the action started. Didn't really work out
how to keep it going, tho'...
The_Beast
A version of this, called 'The Sun Never Sets' by Dave Waxtel and Barry
Gray, appeared in The Courier magazine (Vol III, No. 4, Jan - Feb 1982,
eek, there are probably a number of members of this list who are younger than
this magazine! Yes, my child, in them thar days magazines were printed!
On
paper! :) )
> The campaign system for The Sword and the Flame has an ingenious
In FT, perhaps all the players would be members of the UN, or the governing
council of one of the powers, while also protecting their patch when playing
their own fleet or power.
Regards
> John Tailby wrote:
But this could help extend the campaign for ever (not necessarily a bad
idea ;))
On a side note - has anyone tried or read Victory By Any Means.. is it
overkill or do they have something usefull that should prompt me to buy
it??
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 08:38:46AM +0100, Claus Paludan wrote:
> On a side note - has anyone tried or read Victory By Any Means.. is it
It's pretty good stuff. A bit heavyweight, but it _is_ designed to be
played as a stand-alone game rather than just a front-end to a tactical
game (it has its own large-scale tactical resolution system). It's
mostly quite generic though it does rely on the idea of "jump lanes" (that
limit both where you can go and how many ships you can move at once) rather
than allowing free movement. Definitely worth a look, I'd say; it's what I'm
likely to use if I ever run another campaign.
There's an unofficial tie-in package on the VBAM yahoogroup site - which
I believe uses some of the battle setup from my (and hence Reason's)
system. :-)
> Roger Burton West wrote:
> It's pretty good stuff. A bit heavyweight, but it _is_ designed to be
Yes I looked at bit at their maps and the jumplane thing was pretty evident..
Can't figure out which would be the better approach though. But control of
jumpgates etc would of course suddenly become an issue..
allthough this might be the solution for me as an umpire - I could make
most of the map jumpgates controlled by the ESU(me) and have the others use
those gates (perhaps for a small fee hehe). They could then battle more or
less with each other and perhaps at a later point take on me as well.
> There's an unofficial tie-in package on the VBAM yahoogroup site -
Ok - will go look at that as well :)
What exactly is this Reason?? a person? a system???? any links to anything on
the net? (I know you said Reason it self disappeared but...)
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 10:45:11AM +0100, Claus Paludan wrote:
> What exactly is this Reason?? a person? a system???? any links to
Sorry - he's a guy I knew about fifteen years ago when we were both at
university. Last I heard he was at rice.edu but even that's some ten years
back now.
> Roger Burton West wrote:
Ahhh - that explains it :) Thanks!
> Doug Evans wrote:
I
> tried to work up for Buck Rogers system. One already mentioned, one
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
> A version of this, called 'The Sun Never Sets' by Dave Waxtel and Barry
On
> paper! :) )
> In FT, perhaps all the players would be members of the UN, or the
I played in one of those campaigns and it was fun. I was an MP, British second
in command in India and first in command of the Boers.
As British second in command I was sent with native Indian troops to
Afghanistan when India was restless and Afghanistan was in open conflict. When
Afghanistan quieted down I went back to India and was sent to South Africa
(India was still restless) and was attached to the column that avenged the
distruction of a British column fighting the Zulus. The general theory was if
Indian forces mutiny it's better to have them anywhere but in India.
As Boer commander I got the Boers into a restless state and was in the zone
next to the zone where the first British column was ambushed by the Zulus. My
three units of mounted Boers showed up on the edge of the battlefield but
could not enter or shoot into "British" territory but could accept survivors
that made it into our territory. After the first shock wore off the Zulu
commander just ignored us and didn't get within "a threat" range.
By having two commanders for each command one person could miss a turn and the
game could go on. The only problem was that there wasn't enough
cut-throat gamers so each native uprising usually got smashed due to
sufficient forces being sent.
Anyone tried matrix Gamming?
I tried out a gaming system using matrix gamming which was interesting. Each
player would propose an action and reason for the action based on a set of
possible actions and reasons and each player would vote on the action and then
a random chance role is made.
For example:
Fleet 19 of UN will return to base due to need for overhaul. The canned action
in this case was "return to base" and the canned reason was "needed overhaul".
The players would argue the order: the fleet just arrived the previous turn
from base and had been at base for three turns. The vote was let's say 6 to 2
against (gamemaster gets 2 votes)
so subtracted 40% (2 for - 6 against times 10%) chance and base was 40%
so there 10% chance (always at least 10% chance and never more then a 90%
chance orderers will be followed) fleet will follow the order and return to
base. Politics can enter in and deals can be struck so that I vote for this
and you'll vote for that.
Tie this in with a "normal" game and it could go like this. UN Fleet 19 joins
with NAC fleet Force "C" to defend against the invasion of the BEMs (please
fill in with any Bug Eyed Monsters you choose). The BEM player in matrix part
of game proposes order (see above) and when the dice is thrown a 1 is thrown
and UN Fleet 19 heads back to base and will have to stay for at least 1 turn
at base before doing anything.
The next turn the NAC commander could issue order: Fleet 19 will "ignore
orders" due to "critical situation" of invasion by BEM.
The UN commander could issue order: BEM 6th armada will "return to base" due
to "unrest of forces" due to missing religious festival.
The BEM commander could issue orders: Fleet 19 of UN will "return to base" due
to "shortage of supplies" with the assumption that the first order may be
cancelled.
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lThe complete
article is available through MagWeb
_____
From: gzg-l-bounces@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
[mailto:gzg-l-bounces@lists.csua.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Scott
Siebold
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 4:12 PM
To: gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: Re: [GZG] Re: First go at a campaign - some questions
> A version of this, called 'The Sun Never Sets' by Dave Waxtel and Barry
On
> paper! :) )
> In FT, perhaps all the players would be members of the UN, or the
I played in one of those campaigns and it was fun. I was an MP, British second
in command in India and first in command of the Boers.
As British second in command I was sent with native Indian troops to
Afghanistan when India was restless and Afghanistan was in open conflict. When
Afghanistan quieted down I went back to India and was sent to South Africa
(India was still restless) and was attached to the column that avenged the
distruction of a British column fighting the Zulus. The general theory was if
Indian forces mutiny it's better to have them anywhere but in India.
As Boer commander I got the Boers into a restless state and was in the zone
next to the zone where the first British column was ambushed by the Zulus. My
three units of mounted Boers showed up on the edge of the battlefield but
could not enter or shoot into "British" territory but could accept survivors
that made it into our territory. After the first shock wore off the Zulu
commander just ignored us and didn't get within "a threat" range.
By having two commanders for each command one person could miss a turn and the
game could go on. The only problem was that there wasn't enough
cut-throat gamers so each native uprising usually got smashed due to
sufficient forces being sent.
Anyone tried matrix Gamming?
I tried out a gaming system using matrix gamming which was interesting. Each
player would propose an action and reason for the action based on a set of
possible actions and reasons and each player would vote on the action and then
a random chance role is made.
For example:
Fleet 19 of UN will return to base due to need for overhaul. The canned action
in this case was "return to base" and the canned reason was "needed overhaul".
The players would argue the order: the fleet just arrived the previous turn
from base and had been at base for three turns. The vote was let's say 6 to 2
against (gamemaster gets 2 votes) so subtracted 40% (2 for
- 6 against times 10%) chance and base was 40% so there 10% chance
(always at least 10% chance and never more then a 90% chance orderers will be
followed) fleet will follow the order and return to base. Politics can enter
in and deals can be struck so that I vote for this and you'll vote for that.
Tie this in with a "normal" game and it could go like this. UN Fleet 19 joins
with NAC fleet Force "C" to defend against the invasion of the BEMs (please
fill in with any Bug Eyed Monsters you choose). The BEM player in matrix part
of game proposes order (see above) and when the dice is thrown a 1 is thrown
and UN Fleet 19 heads back to base and will have to stay for at least 1 turn
at base before doing anything.
The next turn the NAC commander could issue order: Fleet 19 will "ignore
orders" due to "critical situation" of invasion by BEM.
The UN commander could issue order: BEM 6th armada will "return to base" due
to "unrest of forces" due to missing religious festival.
The BEM commander could issue orders: Fleet 19 of UN will "return to base" due
to "shortage of supplies" with the assumption that the first order may be
cancelled.
Scott
***
Took some screen prints of the Visio files so you can look, but not have to
deal with these BIG files. I made 'em huge to run on a plotter, so the
planetary hexes would be big enough for the Fortress America figs I was
thinking of using in for gropos action
Part One represents two outer orbits, and Part Deux was to be the planet
and a 'geo'-syncronous orbit, 'geo' as this wasn't to be earth, but a
near colony where rules of engagement required limited ortillery, and
atmosphere insertion with limited collateral damage as the equator would have
been kept as unsettled for just this reason.
***
Just remembered that the Part Deux planetary map is supposed to be also to
limit the ortillery and insertion to just a couple of sections of the planet.
It helps if you think of the geosync orbit as being around the equator (duh)
and the planet 'slices rotated perpendicular to the sheet,
and the ends bent inward to make a psuedo-globe.
Then, the quarter, or half (never decided on that either) of the globed
defined by the lines directly under each geosync octagon were 'fair targets'.
The more I look the piccies, the more I remembered bits I'd worked out, but
never written down. For instance, I would the leading sections, not equally
fore and aft, for the insertion, assuming drop pods and landing shuttles would
be in faster orbits just before hitting real atmosphere.
Sorry for any parts you already figured out. ;->=
The_Beast
***
Took some screen prints of the Visio files so you can look, but not have to
...
***
Oh, merde...
Sorry, that was a reply that should have gone to Nyrath. Stupid
cut-and-paste...
The_Beast