Rivet Wars: Armies! Table Top Rules
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 28

Thread: Rivet Wars: Armies! Table Top Rules

  1. #1

    Default Rivet Wars: Armies! Table Top Rules

    Here is a link to Rivet Wars: Armies! This is a beta release. Early in development but we think it's pretty fun and the plan has always been to release this often with new updates and to grow the system.

    We will guide the development based on these goals:


    -Give players a way to play a game with huge numbers of minis
    -Allow players to use any of those great custom game tables they have
    -Stay true to the feel of Rivet Wars the board game
    -Allow players to have fun creating armies before a game starts
    -Look for opportunities for players to add customization to units, squads, weapons etc.

    We hope you enjoy this. Let us know what you think. This really came about because of all the kickstarter backers and the great community that has grown up around the game.
    Special thanks to everyone who has helped with this especially Crazyjuan, Tauwolf, Pepe, Pod and Mr. Black. Now get in the fight!

    http://rivetwars.com/docs/RivetWarsA...ules_test1.pdf

    Name:  Rivet Wars Logo Armies.jpg
Views: 1083
Size:  23.2 KB

  2. #2

  3. #3

    Default

    Stupid frikkin forum, log post deleted due to insane position of reply buttons
    So, in short. Not liking IGOYOUGO as you will not want to move your models only to have them wiped out as oppo shoots first. It's ok in RW as you have to move forward to get VP's and you always get replacements, but not for a limited army tabletop game.

    Would prefer alternate player/unit activation with a command and control system so you don't have complete control over every unit.
    Could have a player activates, can try to activate on subsequent units on a 4+ but stops when they fail.
    A hero with a unit can allow a re-roll.
    Then other player does the same.
    When 1 side only has units left, you can then try to activate ALL remaining units on a 4+

  4. #4

  5. #5

    Default

    I have to agree with HitHero that alternating activations seems to be a much more balanced approach for a table top game.

    I know there are popular GW games that have IGoYouGo, but in bigger games it becomes "nap-time" for the other player.

    Additionally, alternating activations gives a truer sense of simultaneous actions in battle, with a convergence of action and reaction, rather than the feeling of an army standing around watching their brethren get slaughtered while trying to mentally formulate a response.

    You can always throw in "abilities" for certain "chain activations," but always having the entire army alpha strike makes for a weaker game IMHO.

  6. #6
    Senior Member blkdymnd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Shelton, Washington, United States
    Posts
    143
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Awesome Ted! Before I make any idea changes, I'll actually try it first. Will definitely play as soon as we can.

  7. #7

    Default

    Glad you guys are excited about this.

    Alternating activations...very interesting idea. But per squad not unit. We've been feverishly discussing this and talking it through. That could be really exciting.

  8. #8

    Default

    Yes. sorry. forgot to Americanise my post I'm used to Unit defining a group of soldiers/models rather than meaning a single model.

  9. #9

    Default

    That's interesting. I can see the merits in having it activated that way. Previously I've played two "minatures games" battletech and Dust Warfare. Battletech uses alternating activation, Dust uses whole army activation. To my mind, it bascially is a preference thing. Dust felt like more proper prior planning/anticipation of the enemy was required because you couldn't really adjust your plan that turn on the fly. Whereas Battletech's alternating activation allowed more flexibility in reaction once the units started moving. I think this could be fun either way. Good feedback Hithero.

  10. #10
    Senior Member blkdymnd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Shelton, Washington, United States
    Posts
    143
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Dust Warfare used a two stage activation. You had limited activation in the command phase, then the second players command phase, then the rest of your army went, and then the second player. The balancing of that was in the reaction and suppression system where maybe some of your units couldn't activate or the opponent would make you pay for your unit activation. It's one of the best systems out there, but unfortunately Battlefront and Dust did not make a good deal with FFG to change hands well, and the system will be soon forgotten in Battlefronts continued mis management of Dust.

    So, UgoIgo can still work in the right situation. I do prefer alt activation, but only where the opponents can't spam for extra activations.

  11. #11

    Default

    its true what you said about DW. I over simplified the system because that system, as decent as it is, is likely not going to jive well with the way Rivet Wars is designed. Not without violating the integrity of the "Rivet Wars feel". By which I mean uncomplicated and easy to get someone into, but with enough depth to keep the game interesting for people who have many games under thier belt. I think one of the goals with Rivet Wars Armies was to maintain that feel as much as possible and that dual stage system would be a move away from that I think.

  12. #12

    Default

    It's to be hoped they don't dispense with the reaction based system for Dust or I, for one, will be sticking to Warfare. Its an awesome dynamic system that works perfectly imho, I think And Chambes Starship Troopers was its seminal appearance and even though it was less streamlined it still gives the MI v Arachnid battles a real 'movie feel'

    I do agree however that the reaction system can prove a little distracting to new players, the constant stopping to check distance, etc. As such an alternate squad movement system might work better for Rivets more simplistic play style and works towards a more balanced and tactical game. Never likes the old school method of one side activates everything then the other as it led to some terrible situations where just because you have a few lousy rolls you could see your entire force slaughtered before you even get a chance to do anything, looking on in a puzzled manner as your troops rush forward into the inevitable slaughter with seemingly no positive impact to the battle as a whole....so...a lot like the real WW1 conflict there then!

  13. #13

    Default

    So... If we are talking big armies, we are going to need a more efficient way to buy troops than multiple board game boxes!

  14. #14

    Default

    Paul and myself had a 2x starter set battle last night giving 6 units each so have a few notes.

    1) Please change the definition of Unit to mean a group of models, this cause confusion last night. In military terms a squad of men is a Unit.

    2) Who goes first? We just rolled off again, higher choosing.

    3) Road Runner (beep-beep) Buff. What units actually get the buff? We decided that all ground units should but no keen on the buff applying to units that move off the road and to qualify, units must spend their entire move on the road. But am ok with it staying the same as the board game to avoid confusion.

    4) Grid attacks are now too powerful and now have a far greater value than a Chain attack (Mono-wheel) or a multiple shot attack (MG’s). Other weapons have still go the same kill-rate but rolling against each of 10 models in a unit is a slaughter, especially when you have a unit of 4 Pounders. It basically means a dead unit shooting from long, unreachable ranges. You want to see how powerful Parman is in attack now J

    Maybe a grid attack should only effect models of an equivalent of 4 Infantry or 2x Bikes etc.

    5) Broken is the wrong term for a unit not doing anything, Broken conjures up images of men fleeing. I suggest using Suppressed or use Broken and have the unit take a compulsory move away from the enemy, this could result in a unit fleeing off table. It will also increase its survivability as it moves out of range.

    6) With Gas, do you attack a model if any part of it is under the 3” area, or do you still measure to the centre of the model, we took it as any part. Gascon has now become a really good, annoying character by making units detour in their advance.

    7) To prevent the domination of large units, I’d suggest that they can’t switch target if they wipe out a unit and if they have multiple weapons like the tanks, all targets are declared before rolling the dice.

    Think that’s about it for now.

    The game was really enjoyable but the rules favour the Allies by a huge amount. Having the long range devastating Pounders forces the Blight forward then the Allies then get the first attack in due to their Rapid Assaults. Parman with a unit of bikes is awesome J Thinking about it, I didn’t shoot once with the Riflemen either.

    Heres a few pics:









  15. #15

    Default

    Wicked Photos!

    Now all I need is a gaming table[....one day]
    Rivet Wars Scenario Editor - http://www.tehill.net/RivetWars

  16. #16

    Default

    Thanks for the feedback! I'll try to address each point. But first, I have to remind everyone that this rule set is still very much in early Beta status. Ted wanted to get these rules out to you guys in their absolute earliest playable version. So, yeah, we haven't even examined in any detail how the action cards will effect the game. Feedback and possible red flags are very strenuously encouraged. During your games, if you come across questions, just use your best common sense and work through it.

    Quote Originally Posted by hithero View Post
    Paul and myself had a 2x starter set battle last night giving 6 units each so have a few notes.

    1) Please change the definition of Unit to mean a group of models, this cause confusion last night. In military terms a squad of men is a Unit.
    ******** That's for Ted to work out. But I do find myself always saying "Unit" when I mean "Squad" when discussing these rules, so I guess I agree haha.


    2) Who goes first? We just rolled off again, higher choosing.
    ******** Sounds good to me, haha. We'll address it in the next draft.


    3) Road Runner (beep-beep) Buff. What units actually get the buff? We decided that all ground units should but no keen on the buff applying to units that move off the road and to qualify, units must spend their entire move on the road. But am ok with it staying the same as the board game to avoid confusion.
    ******** Yeah, when trying to decide how to work something out, usually lean towards the easiest method. Rivet Wars is a beautifully simple rule set, and I believe we are all working hard to retain that feel in the tabletop rules. So, in this case, as an example, I would personally see the rule shaking out as follows: "All Units in a Squad must have the Runner ability for the Squad to be able to use Runner. A Squad must begin a movement with it's center point over duckboard or road terrain to gain the extra movement, although the movement may take the Squad off the duckboard/road."


    4) Grid attacks are now too powerful and now have a far greater value than a Chain attack (Mono-wheel) or a multiple shot attack (MG’s). Other weapons have still go the same kill-rate but rolling against each of 10 models in a unit is a slaughter, especially when you have a unit of 4 Pounders. It basically means a dead unit shooting from long, unreachable ranges. You want to see how powerful Parman is in attack now J

    Maybe a grid attack should only effect models of an equivalent of 4 Infantry or 2x Bikes etc.
    ******** Yikes. Yeah, sounds harsh. Obviously we haven't addressed this yet, but it'll get a good close look.


    5) Broken is the wrong term for a unit not doing anything, Broken conjures up images of men fleeing. I suggest using Suppressed or use Broken and have the unit take a compulsory move away from the enemy, this could result in a unit fleeing off table. It will also increase its survivability as it moves out of range.
    ******** Ted's call. I prefer the rule as it stands (Squad hits the deck for a turn), and support the name change to "Suppressed".


    6) With Gas, do you attack a model if any part of it is under the 3” area, or do you still measure to the centre of the model, we took it as any part. Gascon has now become a really good, annoying character by making units detour in their advance.
    ******** I'd say any part. If it's touching, that rivet's having a bad day.


    7) To prevent the domination of large units, I’d suggest that they can’t switch target if they wipe out a unit and if they have multiple weapons like the tanks, all targets are declared before rolling the dice.
    ******** I like the "declare targets before rolling dice" suggestion.

  17. #17

    Default

    @Hithero - Great feedback and great pics. Thank you for testing this out and calling out all those points, that is exactly what we're looking for. I'll try and get that information integrated.

    I am curious about two things if you have a chance to comment.
    1-how did you find the turn order? Or did you play alternating squads?
    2-how many points did you use for your armies (or just all the minis in the 2 starter sets)? Did that feel small, large, fast game? You'd want to try bigger or smaller armies?

    Thanks again. This kind of stuff really helps the community and game.

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Terranova View Post
    @Hithero - Great feedback and great pics. Thank you for testing this out and calling out all those points, that is exactly what we're looking for. I'll try and get that information integrated.

    I am curious about two things if you have a chance to comment.
    1-how did you find the turn order? Or did you play alternating squads?
    2-how many points did you use for your armies (or just all the minis in the 2 starter sets)? Did that feel small, large, fast game? You'd want to try bigger or smaller armies?

    Thanks again. This kind of stuff really helps the community and game.
    No problem and my pleasure

    1. We played alternating sides as per the rules to give us a base line to work from before making changes, and much to my surprise it worked well but it did favour the Allies due to the Pounders range, this forced the Blight to commit to come forward, which in turn were then severely attacked by a Parman lead bike squad utilising Rapid Assault. At the other end of the table, the Blight did a lot better, so I'm guessing things might even out with a larger game where this might not have such a big effect on the game. I think the Allies currently have a distinct advantage. We never had time to play a second game to try alternate squad activation.

    2. We used two full games but only one set of heroes. This gave us 6 units, it didn't feel small, but this is the minimum of units I'd expect for a battle game and would certainly want to field another 3 units to make it a 'normal' sized battle game. The game seemed to move along quickly but it did take 2 hours but did include a lot of looking up and rules discussion, and we fought until the Blight were down to one unit. So, experience and objectives will end in a shorter time.

  19. #19

    Default

    There is one other thought, In our game the MG-08's ,got wiped out by the Pounders, and the Allied Infantry never got to shoot but I would imagine that rolling for each models individual shots will be rather tedious and time consuming. In battle game you really do have to fire as a squad rather than individuals, it's not so bad for a couple of tanks but rolling multiple lots of 3 dice for the Riflemen is not good. You could just bulk roll for a groups attacks and count the hits but this will lead to greater casualties than rolling each model individually.

  20. #20

    Default

    Updated the rules. Lots of the suggestions from Tau, and Hithero. Also added a first pass at a simple army list based on two core boxes.

    Same link http://rivetwars.com/docs/RivetWarsA...ules_test1.pdf I'm going to add notes about what has changed with each update.

    Hithero, thanks for the great feedback and pics. I'm hopeful this will make things even more fun at the expo when we try things out.

    And again, thanks to everyone for their feedback and help.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Privacy Policy  |   Terms and Conditions  |   Contact Us  |   The Legion


Copyright © 2001-2018 CMON Inc.

-->