Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Sup Dakka!
I'm working on a simple wargame for me and my brothers (a hopeful gateway to 40k) and i need some help. The game relies on a rock paper scissors method for attacking: you roll a dice and based on your unit's placement in the RPC Triange (or Pentagon as in my idea) you get a modifier.
Heres the basic idea, with weapon names.
Melee>Range>Far>Calvary>Heavy>Melee
Sword>Bow>Spear>Lance>Axe>Sword

Ex: Your Calvary unit charges my unit of axemen you would get a +1 bonus to roll but if i charged you I would get a -1bonus to roll

Any C&C on this idea? Any thing you would change Dakka?

EDIT Here are the basic rules

Board
The game is played on a 25'x25' board (each inch is represented by a square)
Movement
To move you roll a dice to see how far your unit moves (roll for each unit)
Movement rolls are as followed:
foot troops move D6
Mounted troops move D9 (D6+D3)
After movement Units may charge an extra D3
Combat
After a unit charges another unit they go into combat
to attack you roll a number of D6s equal to the number of ranks your unit has then divided by two
then you add bonus's based on modifiers
Units
Unit cycle
Melee>Far>Mounted>Heavy>Melee
Sword>Spear>Lance/Sword>Axe/Greatsword>Sword
When a unit attacks a weaker unit( > ) it gets +1 to roll
When a unit attacks a stronger unit ( < ) it gets -1 to roll
Heavy has +2 to attack in first round of combat if they are charged
Mounted units receive +1 to roll on first combat of game (they use their lances then drop them in favor of a sword)
Ranged units have +1 to roll from attacking any other unit and may attack anyone within 10 squares of them, But any other gets +1 for attacking a ranged unit
Unit Ranks
Melee=6 Far=4 Mounted=2 Heavy=2 Range=6

What do you think?

This works fairly well in my experience with PC games, at least. There's a very traditional RPS effect that's often present in the spears-swords-cavalry sense (with many variations), so making it the basis of a very simple wargame should be quite effective.

I would consider making it only a single circle of effects, though, since I'm kind of confused as to where the axeman's -1 comes from (is it because the cavalry is behind melee in the circle, or because they're axes charging lances). It might be worthwhile to have a single circle with a couple exceptions.

For instance:
Melee* > Spear > Cavalry > Melee
Archers gain +1 whenever attacking at range, but everyone gets +1 when attacking them in melee.

*: both swords and axes count as melee in this situation; there's no real rhyme or reason to separate them when you're working out a simple system like this. It also keeps a very simple 3-part circle going, instead of someone having to figure out whether or not the bows are getting a bonus against the axes or vice versa. Traditionally, IIRC, axes are the "anti-melee melee" but that is really hard to fit into this sort of setup.

I agree with magc here, except swap Cavalry (lances) with spears. A lance is longer than a spear, and a unit of cavalry charging a unit of footmen with spears will hit them before they have to worry about the spears. Similarly, a spear would give an advantage over a melee unit charging them as the spears outreach the melee weapons.

Ordo Dakka wrote:I agree with magc here, except swap Cavalry (lances) with spears. A lance is longer than a spear, and a unit of cavalry charging a unit of footmen with spears will hit them before they have to worry about the spears. Similarly, a spear would give an advantage over a melee unit charging them as the spears outreach the melee weapons.

This largely depends on specific period and the "spears" in question, and the level of complexity desired in the game. When you're dealing with massive levels of abstraction (especially in an effort to make a simple RPS circle) some shortcuts must be made. Besides, "cavalry" doesn't always mean "heavy cavalry with lances". If you've got those, then you've got pikemen (designed to counter the lances), and if you've got pikemen you've got zweihanders (designed to counter the pikes). Rock-paper-scissors is universal, at least until gunpowder.

True.

Ordo Dakka wrote:I agree with magc here, except swap Cavalry (lances) with spears. A lance is longer than a spear, and a unit of cavalry charging a unit of footmen with spears will hit them before they have to worry about the spears. Similarly, a spear would give an advantage over a melee unit charging them as the spears outreach the melee weapons.

In history, steady foot rarely had trouble facing down cavalry. That's because horses do not like charging into a serious obstacle. The horseman has to master the mount as well as his own trepidation.

Cavalry succeeded because they often didn't have to face steady foot. A horse is a large, frightening creature. Only well trained or motivated infantry were capable of standing firm.

From a game design viewpoint this is only important if you want it to be.

The old GameBoy classic Nobunaga's Ambition features three troop types, infantry (with spears), cavalry, and infantry (with arquebuses). If I remember correctly, the combat advantage went Cavalry>>Spears>>Arquebuses>>Cavalry. Cavalry also had a speed advantage, while Spears could hide in woods, and Arquebuses has an advantage in sieges.

The way to organise the units for your game is to make a five sided or six sided figure, depending on how many unit types you want to include. Decide how much advantage a unit at one point will get versus its neighbours and its opposites. Then place your unit types on the diagram according to how you want the game to work.

Well I included the axe bit because i wanted a heavier unit in addition to the the regular units.
Here is the updated version.

Sword>Spear>Mounted>Axe>Sword
Mounted +1 attack on first combat
Bow= +1 to attack at range, +1 to attack against in melee

It comes from swords being able to get in between the spears, spears stabing horses (they lost the lance after the first stirke and are forced to use swords), Mounted stiking too fast for axe to counter, axe acts like elite breaker unit killing in first turn before swords can strike. and bows being able to hit from far but useless in melee

What do you think?

anything?

Lord of battles wrote:Well I included the axe bit because i wanted a heavier unit in addition to the the regular units.
Here is the updated version.

Sword>Spear>Mounted>Axe>Sword
Mounted +1 attack on first combat
Bow= +1 to attack at range, +1 to attack against in melee

It comes from swords being able to get in between the spears, spears stabing horses (they lost the lance after the first stirke and are forced to use swords), Mounted stiking too fast for axe to counter, axe acts like elite breaker unit killing in first turn before swords can strike. and bows being able to hit from far but useless in melee

What do you think?

Good logic there, and I think it'll work out well. Simplifying it just that bit makes it much easier for me to understand it, at least.

Anyone else want to comment?

Basic rules are up; See first post

Sounds to me like a decent idea and good 40k prep.

Hi folks.
Has the OP looked at Hordes Of the Thing?
A great simple rule set that can be converted to cover most games...

Mind you its not a lead into 40k, its far to elegant intuitive and balanced for that...

TTFN

Lanrak wrote:Hi folks.
Mind you its not a lead into 40k, its far to elegant intuitive and balanced for that...

TTFN

Agreed
Seriously though, the rules seem solid(ish) and simple enough to grasp quickly.

Well does any one see any problems that could be changed for the better?

Something?