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.

 DrNo172000 wrote:
Huh? Do you mean in game weapons?

I'm really very curious as to what the overall design philosophy is for the game, are you attempting to create something that reflects modern warfare? or something else?

EDITED: Also let's say you are hiding behind a bunch of logs and it provides the ability to ignore 1 hit. I fire a dual mode rocket into to it, but because you can ignore 1 hit you ignore my dual mode rocket, is that correct?

No, the goal is to create a fun, tactical game that uses heavy abstraction in places to help recreate some real world modern military combat principles. Naturally in the far future, warfare will likely look nothing at all like it does today, but frankly that's not the game most of us want to play if it can even be represented at 28mm. So yes, tremendous liberties and abstractions are used in service of getting certain points across...which for me abstraction in tabletop games has always been something I appreciate as long as it makes some logical sense and helps make the game more fun/gives the player tough choices to make in-game.

 yakface wrote:

 DrNo172000 wrote:
Huh? Do you mean in game weapons?

I'm really very curious as to what the overall design philosophy is for the game, are you attempting to create something that reflects modern warfare? or something else?

EDITED: Also let's say you are hiding behind a bunch of logs and it provides the ability to ignore 1 hit. I fire a dual mode rocket into to it, but because you can ignore 1 hit you ignore my dual mode rocket, is that correct?

No, the goal is to create a fun, tactical game that uses heavy abstraction in places to help recreate some real world modern military combat principles. Naturally in the far future, warfare will likely look nothing at all like it does today, but frankly that's not the game most of us want to play if it can even be represented at 28mm. So yes, tremendous liberties and abstractions are used in service of getting certain points across...which for me abstraction in tabletop games has always been something I appreciate as long as it makes some logical sense and helps make the game more fun/gives the player tough choices to make in-game.

You say no, but then you say you are trying to abstract some real world modern military principles, you either are trying to reflect modern warfare or you aren't. In what way do you feel you have successfully abstracted modern military principles? I don't feel you have, I feel you have misunderstood many of those principles and built an unnecessary amount of booking keeping in turn. I won't sit here and list all of what I think is unnecessary as JudgeDoug has already done that.

As someone who has a background in modern military principles and there correct application I do enjoy some abstraction of those principles in a tabletop game that employs weaponry at least bearing some resemblance to modern warfare. For example I enjoy it when things like a combined arms approach and fire and maneuver are viable tactics on the table top.

I may regret this, but out of curiosity, what games do you enjoy?

 Ozymandias wrote:
I may regret this, but out of curiosity, what games do you enjoy?

In terms of being a reflection of modern military principles? Bolt Action is hands down probably the one game that best abstracts that, at least for me. Ambush Alley does a good job as well (designed by a fellow Marine if I remember), there are some other that I'm sure I can't recall. Other than that it entirely depends on what I expect to get. For instance in a Sci Fi game that purports to reflect military principles on a squad based level I expect my extensive knowledge of small unit tactics to give me an advantage.

 DrNo172000 wrote:
You say no, but then you say you are trying to abstract some real world modern military principles, you either are trying to reflect modern warfare or you aren't. In what way do you feel you have successfully abstracted modern military principles? I don't feel you have, I feel you have misunderstood many of those principles and built an unnecessary amount of booking keeping in turn. I won't sit here and list all of what I think is unnecessary as JudgeDoug has already done that.

As someone who has a background in modern military principles and there correct application I do enjoy some abstraction of those principles in a tabletop game that employs weaponry at least bearing some resemblance to modern warfare. For example I enjoy it when things like a combined arms approach and fire and maneuver are viable tactics on the table top.

Fair enough, you are obviously entitled to your opinion.

IMHO, the rules most certainly do cover fire and maneuver, in that shooting at a unit while it is cover will cause it to accrue more suppression. Then, once a unit is suppressed enough (or if you want to gamble on it with a little bit of suppression) you can safely move another unit that is equipped with short-ranged weapons (which tend to fire double the number of shots at short range) into short range of the suppressed unit and obliterate it. In addition, there is a nod to attacking a unit from a direction from which they are unprepared, which is abstracted through the use of a front/rear arc for the unit.

When it comes to combined arms, I'm not entirely sure which aspects of the doctrine you prefer to see employed, but there are certainly some elements of that built into some of the faction rules, such as the Firefly drones painting targets for guided missiles fired from the Hunters, Aerial Drone strikes called in from the Bot Handlers and Karist Angels and shadow walkers being used to cause a form of fear (which counts as automatic extra suppression tokens while they're within 12" of that unit), that other Karist units can then exploit. Not to mention the mechanics command points and having reinforcements come back (representing off-table support being sent in). But certainly trying to represent combined arms was not a focus like getting some elements of fire and maneuver in there.

 DrNo172000 wrote:

 Ozymandias wrote:
I may regret this, but out of curiosity, what games do you enjoy?

In terms of being a reflection of modern military principles? Bolt Action is hands down probably the one game that best abstracts that, at least for me. Ambush Alley does a good job as well (designed by a fellow Marine if I remember), there are some other that I'm sure I can't recall. Other than that it entirely depends on what I expect to get. For instance in a Sci Fi game that purports to reflect military principles on a squad based level I expect my extensive knowledge of small unit tactics to give me an advantage.

See, I disagree with your basic premise. I don't think Maelstrom's edge "purports to reflect military principles on a squad based level." Jon has said that one inspiration was a video game that taught basic squad based tactics but the game purports itself to be (from the KS page):

A squad-based tabletop wargame with tactically interesting but mechanically fluid rules, perfect for someone who appreciates strategy, pace and engagement.

A brand new sci-fi universe supported by years of writing and published novels.

A boxed set featuring extremely detailed multi-part and multi-pose plastic models, ensuring no two models need look the same.

A complete package of rules, models, dice, templates, and tokens - everything you need to play out of the box.

I don't have any real-life military experience, but that isn't why I play miniature games. I am super interested in this game, but I'm basically the target audience, someone who used to play 40k but who is disillusioned with the current state of that game and wants a game where maneuvering and tactical choices matter. From what it sounds like, maybe this isn't the game for you and judgedoug (which is ok).

 Spiral Arm Studios wrote:

 DrNo172000 wrote:
You say no, but then you say you are trying to abstract some real world modern military principles, you either are trying to reflect modern warfare or you aren't. In what way do you feel you have successfully abstracted modern military principles? I don't feel you have, I feel you have misunderstood many of those principles and built an unnecessary amount of booking keeping in turn. I won't sit here and list all of what I think is unnecessary as JudgeDoug has already done that.

As someone who has a background in modern military principles and there correct application I do enjoy some abstraction of those principles in a tabletop game that employs weaponry at least bearing some resemblance to modern warfare. For example I enjoy it when things like a combined arms approach and fire and maneuver are viable tactics on the table top.

Fair enough, you are obviously entitled to your opinion.

IMHO, the rules most certainly do cover fire and maneuver, in that shooting at a unit while it is cover will cause it to accrue more suppression. Then, once a unit is suppressed enough (or if you want to gamble on it with a little bit of suppression) you can safely move another unit that is equipped with short-ranged weapons (which tend to fire double the number of shots at short range) into short range of the suppressed unit and obliterate it. In addition, there is a nod to attacking a unit from a direction from which they are unprepared, which is abstracted through the use of a front/rear arc for the unit.

When it comes to combined arms, I'm not entirely sure which aspects of the doctrine you prefer to see employed, but there are certainly some elements of that built into some of the faction rules, such as the Firefly drones painting targets for guided missiles fired from the Hunters, Aerial Drone strikes called in from the Bot Handlers and Karist Angels and shadow walkers being used to cause a form of fear (which counts as automatic extra suppression tokens while they're within 12" of that unit), that other Karist units can then exploit. Not to mention the mechanics command points and having reinforcements come back (representing off-table support being sent in). But certainly trying to represent combined arms was not a focus like getting some elements of fire and maneuver in there.

Fair enough we will have to agree to disagree on how those things actually work. Otherwise we will end up in a never ending discussion about core mechanics that will not change as you have stated. That wouldn't be helpful to either of us.

For combined arms, I will give you the most basic example at the squad level straight from Marine Corps doctrine. The M249 pins the enemy so that you can kill them with HEDP from the M203, the M203 forces the enemy out of their position so that you expose them to hostile fire from the M249 killing them.

@Ozy my premise was based on the fact that yakface stated that he has attempted to abstract modern military principles and that the game is squad based. And while it doesn't say that on the KS, the creator saying it in this thread makes it so for me.

I will admit I am sensitive to such things because I do have a background in it. Also when I see weapons and miniatures on a table that make me think of those things I tend to immediately expect my knowledge to give me an upper hand.





Automatically Appended Next Post:
Note I actually hated Bolt Action after watching a few games of it because it lacked both suppression fire and point fire which are two very different things. Then I played it because I'm a front house manager at a store and JudgeDoug is our Sarge and we were gearing up to carry it and I make it my business to know a little about all the games we carry. I then realized that Bolt Action had beautifully abstracted all the things I wanted and now I love it. So maybe I will give MEdge a try some day and be pleasantly surprised by it.

 DrNo172000 wrote:

Note I actually hated Bolt Action after watching a few games of it because it lacked both suppression fire and point fire which are two very different things. Then I played it because I'm a front house manager at a store and JudgeDoug is our Sarge and we were gearing up to carry it and I make it my business to know a little about all the games we carry. I then realized that Bolt Action had beautifully abstracted all the things I wanted and now I love it. So maybe I will give MEdge a try some day and be pleasantly surprised by it.

I think that's totally fair.

Well, I had some time on my hands, and Alex Holker was so generous with his or her artistic talents, that I thought it was only fair to share some of my Karist Minnow fan art.

Why does the second photo override the first?

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Why does the second photo override the first?

Because they have the same filename, so the attachment system thinks they're the same image.

Talking about the robots, i like the votom/dougram inspired design, the only gripe i have with it is the boxy (right) underarm the underarm should never be bigger than the weapon it makes the weapon look small.

Nice pictures, Bob. You did a good job of capturing the style of the two artists. I might have a go at drawing a Minnow too.

That second one reminds me of futurama for some reason. Probably the guy.

 Spiral Arm Studios wrote:
The rules are definitely not finalized, but we have to get a beta rulebook out to people very soon so making major changes to the core mechanics at this point would likely mean re-configuring much of the existing rules. Therefore, anyone willing to accept the core rules for what they are (even if they have some issues with them) and give feedback within that scope to help solidify the unit rules and find any major loopholes that can be exploited, etc, is more along the lines of what can actually be incorporated at this point.

I just wanted to thank you for responding to my questions and criticisms with the thoughts on your design processes. It's rare to be able to talk to a published game designer in such a way and speaks volumes to your willingness to interact with the community.

 judgedoug wrote:

 Spiral Arm Studios wrote:
The rules are definitely not finalized, but we have to get a beta rulebook out to people very soon so making major changes to the core mechanics at this point would likely mean re-configuring much of the existing rules. Therefore, anyone willing to accept the core rules for what they are (even if they have some issues with them) and give feedback within that scope to help solidify the unit rules and find any major loopholes that can be exploited, etc, is more along the lines of what can actually be incorporated at this point.

I just wanted to thank you for responding to my questions and criticisms with the thoughts on your design processes. It's rare to be able to talk to a published game designer in such a way and speaks volumes to your willingness to interact with the community.

I want to second this, not only that but your responses have always been civil which speaks volumes to someone like me. I will most likely try the game given the chance just because of your civil attitude yakface. Cheers and best of luck on the KS.

I was going to do my take on the Minnows, but the Scarecrows popped up again, so here's another rough sketch.

The main things I changed here were the addition of a second hand, and the longer shoulder-mounted weapon so it's less front heavy.

Damn Bob, you do a wicked cool Watterson style.

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Talking about the robots, i like the votom/dougram inspired design, the only gripe i have with it is the boxy (right) underarm the underarm should never be bigger than the weapon it makes the weapon look small.

Just checked the KS out, love the Hunter robots.... I got that VOTMOS gundog vibe from them.....

I'm not really interested in the game that much but new cool looking robot models do seem to keep me interested. I can't wait until these are on sale How big are they? Can we see them scaled next to another model? Do you have a -planned- price point (even though it might be subject to change aka a ball park figure?)

( the other 'robot' or mecha suit that had me interested was the UAMC suit from the 'game/company/person we shall not name, they had a nice Ma.K vibe to them which I loved.)

Good luck with the KS

SAS posted this photo up in an update, it shows the size of both the Hunter and the Scarecrow:

So, I read the two newest stories and I think the writing has improved. The stories still have the stuff I like, but the prose style is quite a bit better than it was, indeed better than in many published works. The action pacing is improved. There are almost no awkward sentences. The bits of milSF gun-blargle and tech-porn add authenticity to the characters' viewpoints without getting anywhere pervasive enough to warrant a collaborating gig with David Webber. I look forward to reading more.

Also, a lot of the design art that shows up in the updates is really top-notch. I really hope there's a pdf 'art book' for this kickstarter.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Why does the second photo override the first?

Because they have the same filename, so the attachment system thinks they're the same image.

Is this common with Apple products? I had no idea the system wasn't saving my pictures as pic1.jpg, pic2.jpg, etc.. You've just solved a lot of my frustrations with uploading pictures. Thanks!

Alex, Monders, thanks for the encouragement. I have very little art training, so imitation is how I learn, like a parrot learning speech...

Alex, I like what you've changed about the Scarecrow. The two hands and balanced, retractable maglock really add to the utilitarian perception of the mini. I'm not sure whether I like the shortened forearms, though, as they make the robot look more humanoid, like a suit of comic book armor. The head looks more like a helmet than a cockpit in your drawing, too, although I would have preferred the one lens look of the drones and hunters to either. I wish I could do the human form as much justice in perspective without my usual sloppy lines and blurred details.

 judgedoug wrote:

 Spiral Arm Studios wrote:
The rules are definitely not finalized, but we have to get a beta rulebook out to people very soon so making major changes to the core mechanics at this point would likely mean re-configuring much of the existing rules. Therefore, anyone willing to accept the core rules for what they are (even if they have some issues with them) and give feedback within that scope to help solidify the unit rules and find any major loopholes that can be exploited, etc, is more along the lines of what can actually be incorporated at this point.

I just wanted to thank you for responding to my questions and criticisms with the thoughts on your design processes. It's rare to be able to talk to a published game designer in such a way and speaks volumes to your willingness to interact with the community.

I want to echo this, too. Access to the creative team is one of the highlights of the Maelstrom Edge game for me and keeps me coming back.

 AlexHolker wrote:
I was going to do my take on the Minnows, but the Scarecrows popped up again, so here's another rough sketch.

The main things I changed here were the addition of a second hand, and the longer shoulder-mounted weapon so it's less front heavy.

And some thick af thighs and skinny shins.

Don't get me wrong, it definitely looks better than stick leg thighs and ugg boots as the models currently stand
(not that that isn't a valid design as well, I just prefer this drawn one)

but it definitely has some inspiration from human female anatomy. Or perhaps a male that just really enjoys doing squats

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Alex, I like what you've changed about the Scarecrow. The two hands and balanced, retractable maglock really add to the utilitarian perception of the mini. I'm not sure whether I like the shortened forearms, though, as they make the robot look more humanoid, like a suit of comic book armor. The head looks more like a helmet than a cockpit in your drawing, too, although I would have preferred the one lens look of the drones and hunters to either. I wish I could do the human form as much justice in perspective without my usual sloppy lines and blurred details.

I'll have a go at all three of those - the cockpit-like inset head, the single lens head like the other drones, and longer arms more like the models.

 bocatt wrote:
And some thick af thighs and skinny shins.

Don't get me wrong, it definitely looks better than stick leg thighs and ugg boots as the models currently stand
(not that that isn't a valid design as well, I just prefer this drawn one)

but it definitely has some inspiration from human female anatomy. Or perhaps a male that just really enjoys doing squats

Ah, you're right! In the earlier photograph that I was using as a reference the gun arm obscured much of the thighs, so I didn't even notice I had changed it.

Thanks for the feedback, both of you.

Okay, here's the modified versions - one with a lower slung head, and one with a really low slung drone head, and longer arms. Sticking to something close to human proportions for the skeleton has the advantage of allowing better humanlike movement - either so you can use mocap as a shortcut for programming the drones or so that any kind of mental drone control system gives the controller a body that moves like their own instead of with the awkwardness of a sudden growth spurt - but here you go.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
So, I read the two newest stories and I think the writing has improved. The stories still have the stuff I like, but the prose style is quite a bit better than it was, indeed better than in many published works. The action pacing is improved. There are almost no awkward sentences. The bits of milSF gun-blargle and tech-porn add authenticity to the characters' viewpoints without getting anywhere pervasive enough to warrant a collaborating gig with David Webber. I look forward to reading more.

Also, a lot of the design art that shows up in the updates is really top-notch. I really hope there's a pdf 'art book' for this kickstarter.

judgedoug wrote: I just wanted to thank you for responding to my questions and criticisms with the thoughts on your design processes. It's rare to be able to talk to a published game designer in such a way and speaks volumes to your willingness to interact with the community.

I want to echo this, too. Access to the creative team is one of the highlights of the Maelstrom Edge game for me and keeps me coming back.

Thank you for the kind words. Actually two of the three stories of mine released so far ('The Scarecrow' and 'The Shipyard') were the first things I wrote when I joined the project way back in 2011. They've been a tweaked a little since as we developed the factions, but aside from a few changes they are mostly the same as they were then. The third story, 'The Hunter' was written over the last two weeks, so a little more recent! That last story is set during events of the second novel, 'Sacrifice', and actually explains a little part of the plot that occurs late in the novel.

The novel excerpt is from the middle of the first book so perhaps doesn't have the same pace and establishment of character and settings as a standalone story but thank you for the feedback on it - I'll take a look at tweaking the language on that if we do a second release of the books.

All of the core team are gamers and scifi fans and we want to keep that line of dialogue going with the community as much as we can. We tried to create the game we always wanted to play and enjoy, and we appreciate the support and feedback we've got from everyone so far.

 AlexHolker wrote:
Sticking to something close to human proportions for the skeleton has the advantage of allowing better humanlike movement -...

...but the disadvantage of looking less 'scarecrow' and more 'generic humanoid robot'...

 AlexHolker wrote:
Okay, here's the modified versions - one with a lower slung head, and one with a really low slung drone head, and longer arms. Sticking to something close to human proportions for the skeleton has the advantage of allowing better humanlike movement - either so you can use mocap as a shortcut for programming the drones or so that any kind of mental drone control system gives the controller a body that moves like their own instead of with the awkwardness of a sudden growth spurt - but here you go.

That's a really good point... Anyway, the sunken heads don't really do it for me. The rest of the robot bodies remind me of The Black Hole for some reason.

Are you doing these drawings by hand or on a computer?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 darrkespur wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
So, I read the two newest stories and I think the writing has improved. The stories still have the stuff I like, but the prose style is quite a bit better than it was, indeed better than in many published works. The action pacing is improved. There are almost no awkward sentences. The bits of milSF gun-blargle and tech-porn add authenticity to the characters' viewpoints without getting anywhere pervasive enough to warrant a collaborating gig with David Webber. I look forward to reading more.

Also, a lot of the design art that shows up in the updates is really top-notch. I really hope there's a pdf 'art book' for this kickstarter.

judgedoug wrote: I just wanted to thank you for responding to my questions and criticisms with the thoughts on your design processes. It's rare to be able to talk to a published game designer in such a way and speaks volumes to your willingness to interact with the community.

I want to echo this, too. Access to the creative team is one of the highlights of the Maelstrom Edge game for me and keeps me coming back.

Thank you for the kind words. Actually two of the three stories of mine released so far ('The Scarecrow' and 'The Shipyard') were the first things I wrote when I joined the project way back in 2011. They've been a tweaked a little since as we developed the factions, but aside from a few changes they are mostly the same as they were then. The third story, 'The Hunter' was written over the last two weeks, so a little more recent! That last story is set during events of the second novel, 'Sacrifice', and actually explains a little part of the plot that occurs late in the novel.

The novel excerpt is from the middle of the first book so perhaps doesn't have the same pace and establishment of character and settings as a standalone story but thank you for the feedback on it - I'll take a look at tweaking the language on that if we do a second release of the books.

All of the core team are gamers and scifi fans and we want to keep that line of dialogue going with the community as much as we can. We tried to create the game we always wanted to play and enjoy, and we appreciate the support and feedback we've got from everyone so far.

The Scarecrow feels like a more polished story than the Shipyard to me. I also really enjoyed getting the perspective of a Karist 'cell'. The play between the new squad leader/chaplain and the more down to earth acolytes made me want to read more about the Karists. Also, without spoiling the ending, I like it when machines take advantage of one of their biggest advantages over biologicals.


The Hunter is the best of the three, and it definitely made me want to assemble some drones to play pew-pews with. I enjoyed the limited viewpoint scenes from the Hunter's POV, and the main character was engaging. It's fun to get an idea of what the Epirians do in their daily lives before things blow up.

I'll let you know what I think of the novels when I finally get to read them in paperback.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The biggest weakness in The Shipyard was a tendency to put the emotional climax at the beginning of long sentences. It robbed certain scenes of their full potency, such as when a beloved drone died... and then the sentence went on about a routine patrol through some mountains and kind of kept going and tapering off ...and now the focus is kind of diluted. I haven't seen that in the other two stories, though, which is great.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Anyway, the sunken heads don't really do it for me. The rest of the robot bodies remind me of The Black Hole for some reason.

Are you doing these drawings by hand or on a computer?

I've been doing these on the computer in GIMP. It's a pity you didn't like the reworks, but I've got another drone concept I'm working on that you might like.

 AlexHolker wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Anyway, the sunken heads don't really do it for me. The rest of the robot bodies remind me of The Black Hole for some reason.

Are you doing these drawings by hand or on a computer?

I've been doing these on the computer in GIMP. It's a pity you didn't like the reworks, but I've got another drone concept I'm working on that you might like.

You did a fine job drawing them. The things I didn't like we're my own suggestions. Just didn't know how they would pan out.

I'm always up for more drones.

I like the "Grasshopper" drone idea they had in the update today.



I might do that for all my drones, as just designate between Spiders and Wasps based on what is/isn't on flying bases.