A thought:
Mikko mentioned that miniatures gaming while doing hidden sneak and peak is
kind of problematic. Having run a hidden minis game, it does make you wonder
sometimes about why you paint stuff. Plus it has some odd sensations when,
after having been spotted, your figure is placed on the board and not only
does the enemy see you, but you have a strange feeling you've been seen
(you've been forced to place the mini, after all).
Even so, I find the hide and seek element adds an additional level of thinking
to the game, and it helps discourage Banzai moves, because you never know what
you haven't seen. Audacity seems far more fraught with peril
- is that clump of trees enemy infested? You haven't seen any, but who
knows! It adds a whole other dimension to commanding units. I find it
actually encourages sound strategy and less to-heck-with-the-risks (or
there-are-no-risks-I-can-see-his-figures) style of play. It means you
actually have to watch your flanks and your rear... you don't *know* where
every enemy unit is.
And for practical experience, I'll sight my own microarmour (challenger)
background. It seemed in that game that a lot of the game was spotting... and
you often saw only a portion of the minis on the game board because others
were hidden. It usually worked out okay and was fun, for those who like that
style of game.
These games do suit boardgames, or even better, computer modelled games where
all sorts of erroneous info can easily be provided to a commander without a
huge amount of effort from the ref. That is probably where it shines the most.
But it can be used successfully in a miniatures game, if some thought is
applied. Having the figs hide for the entire game is kind of
silly - else why did you paint them? But having some or all units hidden
to start with (if you have the luxury of a ref) isn't too bad.
So how did you make this work, Tom? Is it possible to have hidden units
without a ref? What do people think of the hidden units rules in DSII and
SGII?
Mike
Mikko mentioned that miniatures gaming while doing hidden sneak and peak is
kind of problematic. Having run a hidden minis game, it does make you wonder
sometimes about why you paint stuff. Plus it has some odd sensations when,
after having been spotted, your figure is placed on the board and not only
does the enemy see you, but you have a strange feeling you've been seen
(you've been forced to place the mini, after all).
Even so, I find the hide and seek element adds an additional level of thinking
to the game, and it helps discourage Banzai moves, because you never know what
you haven't seen. Audacity seems far more fraught with peril
- is that clump of trees enemy infested? You haven't seen any, but who
knows! It adds a whole other dimension to commanding units. I find it
actually encourages sound strategy and less to-heck-with-the-risks (or
there-are-no-risks-I-can-see-his-figures) style of play. It means you
actually have to watch your flanks and your rear... you don't *know* where
every enemy unit is.
And for practical experience, I'll sight my own microarmour (challenger)
background. It seemed in that game that a lot of the game was spotting... and
you often saw only a portion of the minis on the game board because others
were hidden. It usually worked out okay and was fun, for those who like that
style of game.
These games do suit boardgames, or even better, computer modelled games where
all sorts of erroneous info can easily be provided to a commander without a
huge amount of effort from the ref. That is probably where it shines the most.
But it can be used successfully in a miniatures game, if some thought is
applied. Having the figs hide for the entire game is kind of
silly - else why did you paint them? But having some or all units hidden
to start with (if you have the luxury of a ref) isn't too bad.
Thomas Barclay Software Specialist Defence Systems xwave solutions
www.xwavesolutions.com v: (613) 831 2018 x 3008
Alea iacta et pessimo resulto factura est.
Ave, Caesar! Te morituiri salutimas!
************************************************************************
***
Privileged/Confidential Information and/or Copyright Material may
be contained in this e-mail. The information and Material is
intended for the use of the intended addressee. If you are not the intended
addressee, or the person responsible for delivering it to the intended
addressee, you may not copy or deliver it to anyone else or use it in any
unauthorised manner. To do so is
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you receive this e-mail by
mistake, advise the sender immediately by using the reply
facility in your e-mail software.
Thank you.
************************************************************************
**
On 14-Apr-00 at 11:50, Mike.Elliott@bull.co.uk (Mike.Elliott@bull.co.uk)
wrote:
> So how did you make this work, Tom? Is it possible to have hidden
I enjoyed watching a tank game up in Virginia years ago, they were using
hidden units on one side. They put down terrain and moss and he hid his units
in terrain features. The amusing thing (to me anyway) was the individual that
set up lost, while packing up he found 3 tanks that could well have turned the
battle, but he couldn't see them and forgot they were there.
> --- Mike.Elliott@bull.co.uk wrote:
I manage it very nicely: camo schemes. Khaki color scheme on the infantry,
based flocked to match the Geohex. A detechment moved into woods (usually a
fistfull of lichen in our games) and left for a turn tends to be forgotten by
my opponent. Then again, I've forgotten to move a detachment myself once or
twice, but I'm still ahead on the whole scheme.
Quoth "Thomas.Barclay" <Thomas.Barclay@cbu.xwavesolutions.com>...
> .......Having run a hidden minis game, it does make you wonder
I still wake up with the shakes thanks to the "appearance" of enemy troops at
the end of "Grey Day" at GZG ECC III.
> ....... Audacity seems far more fraught with peril
Heh. A simple "sprint to those bushes" turns into a bloodbath quite easily.
Ask my "Predator"...
> ...... and thus the KV plan (which was stunning - Kr'rt saying "the
BTW, what finally happened to the brave Wi'Sel?:)
-=Kr'rt
I'm finally, *finally* painting my LEG Aliens miniatures, and this discussion
has given me a fun scenario idea. More importantly, it should be a *workable*
scenario idea....
Step one is to lay out the board, using Space Hulk and/or Legions of
Steel tiles. Step two is to use graph paper to make a very simple map of the
board, which I will then copy for each team (I'm thinking three teams --
USCMC, the Company, and U.N.). Each square on the tiles is 1" wide, so this
should be a pretty easy map to make. It will also make using the map to track
movement pretty easy as well
During the game, each squad (and group of Aliens) will be represented by a
blip. The players plot their movement on their copies of the map, and I move
the all of the blips in a randomly determined order. When two blips have LOS
on each other, both are revealed and the miniatures that they
represent are placed on the board -- human players will have a
pre-established "marching order" for their squad, and this will
determine where the individual figures are placed. From this point on, the
figures remain on the board and the players move them as normal.
This should, if it works, leave the players uncertain about what each blip
represents: humans or Aliens. And since each team will have its own victory
conditions, they aren't likely to want to cooperate in any case.
This also brings up the question of how to handle, in a hidden game, the use
of Reconnaissance by Fire (An interesting little concept I never thought of
myself, I read about it in the HHandbook for Marines, and confirmed it with
a coworker who is ex-marine) - basically, you find the answer to your
question by firing INTO that clump of trees. If it runs away, fires back, or
bleeds, yes, it IS enemy infested. I brought it up with my marine friend, and
his reply was, "What's even nicer is reconnaissance by Fire by
AIR....
(he had a particular affection, apparently common in the USMC, for his
brothers-in-arms who pilot helicopter gunships).
So how you handle this in a game? For DSII, I would suggest that any time a
spot that potentially COULD hold enemy units comes under fire, you make a
reaction test at a standard +1 threat level. If the unit passes this
test, or there's really nothing there, then nothing happens. If the unit fails
the test, it is revealed. This maintains SOME of the mystery... Ok, nothing
happened... does that mean there's noone there, or that there's someone there,
and they just have godlike testicles?
John Crimmins talks about doing a multi-player game on Space Hulk or
Legions
of Steel grid-like board pieces with each side having a map. He'd move
counters for all the models until they are seen by the enemy.
In a more challenging mode, John, what about only revealing the map to each
player as their models scout it? You have a map on graph paper and they have
tracing paper. As they enter new areas, you draw in the things in line of
sight. When the enemy meet, the common areas are placed on the table with the
miniatures.