PDA

View Full Version : A 40k squad level wargame.



Apollyon
24-08-2006, 16:08
Just to satisfy my own curiousity how many people would play a "true" 40K squad level war-game with movement and weapons ranges in scale? Let's for the purposes of this poll assume the rules were equal in complexity to an average Avalon Hill game. Let us also assume it is no meant to be "balanced" but meant to match the fluff.

AdmiralGrave
24-08-2006, 16:23
I'd love a squad based game to play. Maybe use some of the simpler rules from kill team and quite a few rules from combat patrol as i think they will go well together.

Exploited
24-08-2006, 16:39
*cries for the insanity of second ed*

VORTEX NADES!

LEVEL 4 PSYKERS!

Shadowseer Crofty
24-08-2006, 16:46
do you mean like necromunda with all the forces from 40k?

Deadite
24-08-2006, 16:48
Doesn't necromunda already exist?

Your poll options aren't very topical and are confusing.

Goq Gar
24-08-2006, 17:14
Necromunda does exist, and that is kind of the point of it, but it lacks one thing: Simplicity.

The necromunda rule book (although a fraction the size of the 40k and Fantasy books) is just too "ruley and situationy" for me.

That and whats with the ammo roll? They forget they dont have ammo? The ammo doesnt work? Why is the bolt gun a 6!?

For a squad level game, I would keep most of the 40k rules, but make it the "every model moves individually" style of play, no squad rules.

That and the ranges would have to change. For instance: Bolters.

The bolter would be accurate at most ranges, except for maximum range, but the space marine makes up for it with his advanced optics etc.

So an entry for a space marine with bolter would be a bit like:
Bolter: Strength four, AP five. 15 points.
Ranges and accuracy: 0-12" = 2+, 12-24" = 3+, 36-48" = 4+.
Reliability: 2+. (Rolled to see if the weapon faults).

Space marine ( \/ normal stats line except \/ ) 30 points.
Wounds: 2
Invulnerable save: 5+

x-esiv-4c
24-08-2006, 17:18
The bolter had an ammo roll of 6 because it was difficult to maintain and therefore unreliable.

hellfire
24-08-2006, 17:21
mmm.. beer and pretzels
no I don't like the idea it seems like when you get anything smaller than 2-3 squads you lose real tactics andare just rolling dice

marv335
24-08-2006, 17:22
the whole point of the ammo roll for necromunda is to represent the complexity and ease on maintainance of tech.
lasguns are simple and easy to maintain (that's why the guard get them)
that's why the ammo roll is 2+
bolters are complex an ammo is hard to get. therefore 6+.

robertsjf
24-08-2006, 17:36
do you mean like necromunda with all the forces from 40k?

Beat me to it....

Overlord Krycis
24-08-2006, 17:43
I have "sort-of" done this witha few friends...it was actually quite good fun.

3 Space Marines versus about 15 Imperial Guardsmen was funny...

The way we did it was akin to the rules for Chaos Warbands in Warhammer...it was fairly easy to write the rules and simplifying the weapon/wargear options was fairly straight-forward.

So...in answer, YES I would play a Squad-based game of 40k...

Railgunner
24-08-2006, 17:54
A 40k version of that path to glory thing for choas would be really fun IMO.

Railgunner

FearFrost
24-08-2006, 18:17
This is why I bought an Inquisitor rulebook.

t-tauri
24-08-2006, 18:20
I thought 40k was a squad based wargame-everything moves in squads. ASL-basic unit the squad. What you're talking about here is individual skirmish level gaming.

neXus6
24-08-2006, 18:38
What ever it's name I'd love to play it. :p

I really like necromunda, though it's probably the experiance gaining part that I like the most.
Slightly simplified Necromunda with the full range of 40k races. Now that would be pretty fun. And with more consistent weapon choices you don't end up with the whole having to convert 200 models just to represent all the options your 9 man group has. :p

StormKnight
24-08-2006, 18:57
Just to satisfy my own curiousity how many people would play a "true" 40K squad level war-game with movement and weapons ranges in scale? Let's for the purposes of this poll assume the rules were equal in complexity to an average Avalon Hill game. Let us also assume it is no meant to be "balanced" but meant to match the fluff.


First off , what do you mean by "movement and weapon ranges in scale"? Do you mean in scale with the models? In that case a basic modern assault rifle would have an effective combat range of at least five feet. At the point one hopefully just says "screw it, all weapon fire is LOS".

Second, what do you mean by not meant to be balanced? Do you mean there would be no balancing system (ie point values) and players would just design scenarios with no guidance? Sounds like a lousy design for a game to me - you can ALWAYS toss about a point system and make a custom scenario whatever way you want, but balancing the game is a big part of what I'm willing to pay money for rules for.


the whole point of the ammo roll for necromunda is to represent the complexity and ease on maintainance of tech.
Also keep in mind that ammo rolls in Necromunda represent second hand gear being used by people who aren't military grade troops. In marines were ported into Necromunda, they sure shouldn't have 6+ ammo rolls for their bolters!


...you don't end up with the whole having to convert 200 models just to represent all the options your 9 man group has.
If you play with people who aren't nutso for WYSIWYG, you never have to. Trust me, despite what GW says, the game somehow works just fine anyway ;)

At any rate...there lots of things would be a lot of fun with a really small scale set of skirmish rules. The thought of a group of scouts trying to make it through a dense forest while being stalked by a lictor, or a commando team trying to eliminate an oncoming enemy tank and its support squad...that would all be good fun stuff that really doesn't quite fit in the current rules.
I think the core system would be fine for it, but one would need some good, solid and easy hidden movement rules, and more action options for individual warriors.

Apollyon
24-08-2006, 20:34
First off , what do you mean by "movement and weapon ranges in scale"? Do you mean in scale with the models? In that case a basic modern assault rifle would have an effective combat range of at least five feet. At the point one hopefully just says "screw it, all weapon fire is LOS".
Yes some weapons would indeed be LOS. Terrian would become MUCH more impotant.



Second, what do you mean by not meant to be balanced? Do you mean there would be no balancing system (ie point values) and players would just design scenarios with no guidance? Sounds like a lousy design for a game to me - you can ALWAYS toss about a point system and make a custom scenario whatever way you want, but balancing the game is a big part of what I'm willing to pay money for rules for.

War is seldom if ever a fair fight between evenly matched oppents, scenarios should try to represnt that, the victory conditions of the scenario should be the equalizer. That is not to say point values for units should not be created. The the caveate however is one army may be tiny (in keeping with the fluff) but VERY powerful there will not be a rough simalarity in the number of troops for dissimalar armies. (By fluff there should be 50 to a 100 gaunts per marine...the tabletop should reflect that)



Also keep in mind that ammo rolls in Necromunda represent second hand gear being used by people who aren't military grade troops. In marines were ported into Necromunda, they sure shouldn't have 6+ ammo rolls for their bolters!


If you play with people who aren't nutso for WYSIWYG, you never have to. Trust me, despite what GW says, the game somehow works just fine anyway ;)

At any rate...there lots of things would be a lot of fun with a really small scale set of skirmish rules. The thought of a group of scouts trying to make it through a dense forest while being stalked by a lictor, or a commando team trying to eliminate an oncoming enemy tank and its support squad...that would all be good fun stuff that really doesn't quite fit in the current rules.
I think the core system would be fine for it, but one would need some good, solid and easy hidden movement rules, and more action options for individual warriors.

Yorkiebar
24-08-2006, 21:14
No. It's already here and it's called Necromunda. Or kill-team if you just want to oversimplify your games.

Seth the Dark
24-08-2006, 21:16
I think that the idea would be pretty cool, but don't we already have Inquisitor?

Yorkiebar
24-08-2006, 21:18
Inquisitor is completely different. In some ways it's closer to D&D than 40K, it's at a larger scale and it's more focussed on individuals than groups or squads.

Apollyon
24-08-2006, 21:24
Necromunda is about 80% there, the ranges are off scale and it doesn't include all the armies.


No. It's already here and it's called Necromunda. Or kill-team if you just want to oversimplify your games.

Ravenous
24-08-2006, 21:29
Tried it. Still working on it. Its a pain in the ass, just play 40k

If you want squad based tactics go play paintball or better yet airsoft.

chaos0xomega
24-08-2006, 22:07
I am one of the four that voted no. Why?

You are in an entirely wrong scale for something like this. If everything was done to scale, then weapon ranges would be well into 10 feet, even for lasguns. Not only that, but the minimum ranges on things like basilisks would be over 3.

Epicenter
25-08-2006, 00:34
I'd agree with a "small unit" (I wouldn't say squad) game of 40k. Like about a squad on each side with a lighter vehicle. You could play larger battles, but it would bog down. The only thing that prevents me from agreeing you 100% is...


Let us also assume it is no meant to be "balanced" but meant to match the fluff.


No balance, just the fluff? This sounds like blatant pandering to the SPACE MARINES! who want a game where they get to do what it seems all Space Marine players fantasize about. 100 (or more Guardsmen) totally unable to stop the SPACE MARINES! no matter how many lasguns, rocket launchers, or flamers they use (since this is fluff, it's not fluffy for Guardsmen to get anything that could "logically" hurt a SPACE MARINE! like a plasmagun, meltagun, or anything like that).

Just remember, that if this is true and applied evenly, then Chaos would stomp the Space Marines, because Chaos can fit in even more powerful options onto a single model. Eldar might be able to compete with Chaos using all the devices that Eldar have but don't get on their Codex wargear. Everyone else should just stay home.

Apollyon
25-08-2006, 01:02
Been there done that it was called the Marine Corps now I want some thing I can do with a beer in my hand :D


Tried it. Still working on it. Its a pain in the ass, just play 40k

If you want squad based tactics go play paintball or better yet airsoft.

Apollyon
25-08-2006, 01:04
If you have a BASILISK in a SQUAD level game something is woefully wrong. :wtf:



I am one of the four that voted no. Why?

You are in an entirely wrong scale for something like this. If everything was done to scale, then weapon ranges would be well into 10 feet, even for lasguns. Not only that, but the minimum ranges on things like basilisks would be over 3.

Apollyon
25-08-2006, 01:20
By the fluff every squad of guardsmen should have one special and one heavy weapon. This doesn't "pander" to Marines by the fluff genestealers carve up 'termies, a 'Fex will carve a bloody swath through Marines, Eldar will be naught but a blur (a fragile blur but a blur none the less) a Chaos Legionaire would be a TERROR to behold. GW sees balance as a roughtly even amout of figures each with a 50/50 change of winning. I see balance as 2 side reguardless of number each have equal chance of completeing their victory conditions.



I'd agree with a "small unit" (I wouldn't say squad) game of 40k. Like about a squad on each side with a lighter vehicle. You could play larger battles, but it would bog down. The only thing that prevents me from agreeing you 100% is...



No balance, just the fluff? This sounds like blatant pandering to the SPACE MARINES! who want a game where they get to do what it seems all Space Marine players fantasize about. 100 (or more Guardsmen) totally unable to stop the SPACE MARINES! no matter how many lasguns, rocket launchers, or flamers they use (since this is fluff, it's not fluffy for Guardsmen to get anything that could "logically" hurt a SPACE MARINE! like a plasmagun, meltagun, or anything like that).

Just remember, that if this is true and applied evenly, then Chaos would stomp the Space Marines, because Chaos can fit in even more powerful options onto a single model. Eldar might be able to compete with Chaos using all the devices that Eldar have but don't get on their Codex wargear. Everyone else should just stay home.

Ravenous
25-08-2006, 02:17
Been there done that it was called the Marine Corps now I want some thing I can do with a beer in my hand :D

You can still hold a beer and M16 at the same time, I converted my helmet to a beer helmet so I could still fire the M60.

Ah the military - great stories and you get to blow stuff up for free.

Im still working on the squad based tactics its difficult to say the least to keep it simple without looking up a bunch of charts every 2 seconds, but you dont want it so simple that it takes 10 minutes to play.

Apollyon
25-08-2006, 04:53
Have you ever played "Firepower" from Avalon Hill?


You can still hold a beer and M16 at the same time, I converted my helmet to a beer helmet so I could still fire the M60.

Ah the military - great stories and you get to blow stuff up for free.

Im still working on the squad based tactics its difficult to say the least to keep it simple without looking up a bunch of charts every 2 seconds, but you dont want it so simple that it takes 10 minutes to play.

sigur
25-08-2006, 12:15
Great, military stories....:rolleyes:

Anyway, I have to admit that I never played Avalon Hill (and similar) cosims but I'm very interested in it. The problem with 40k as a squad-level combat game would mainly be balance between different armies. The Necromunda rules are totally fine, use them as a base. Oh, and don't go for "realism" in this one; it won't work.

RampagingRavener
25-08-2006, 12:25
No, but for none of the reasons above. I like larger games, and smaller scale things just don't interest me at all in the slightest. Nothing to do with wanting "simple" rules or thinking that 40k is "perfect". Just couldn't care less about any game which tends to have less than 40-50 models per side at least.

Ravenous
25-08-2006, 17:13
Have you ever played "Firepower" from Avalon Hill?

Heard of it but know nothing of the details.

Psychopomp
25-08-2006, 17:21
It sounds a lot like someone wants to play tiny games of 40K second edition, or perhaps even Rogue Trader...

Chem-Dog
25-08-2006, 17:43
Necromunda would make a fine chassis squad based game, a lot of the exisiting units can be easily translated back into the 2nd edition rules and the newer stuff can be placed by comparison to the older stuff.

If you really have enough time and patience, Inquisitor would make a pretty good basis for a "hyper detailed" squad based game.

Apollyon
25-08-2006, 18:38
1 part Necromunda 2 parts Confrontaion (yes I have a full copy from the WD's) 1 part 2nd ed. ???



Necromunda would make a fine chassis squad based game, a lot of the exisiting units can be easily translated back into the 2nd edition rules and the newer stuff can be placed by comparison to the older stuff.

If you really have enough time and patience, Inquisitor would make a pretty good basis for a "hyper detailed" squad based game.

Apollyon
25-08-2006, 18:40
IMHO the best squad level combat game ever.



Heard of it but know nothing of the details.