Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Man of Paper]

I was going to say what Jerick said but i had to spend the last two+ hours fixing a lane (I'm a bowling alley mechanic). I think ultimately we're trying to balance GM and player preferences, which tends to be a futile effort. Teams are going to win and teams are going to lose, and as long as that's the case there are going to be unhappy players. People need to focus more on having fun in an arms race. Iron Behemoths was a perfect example of, in my opinion, players neutering the game. Even with a name like Iron Behemoths people were wary of trying something new in fear of the rolls. The main reason why the game stayed unique in my opinion was the fact that players had to work around hardset rules added through the Geneva convention. The "pet projects" in the endgame would have probably, for the most part, been viable in the game itself if they'd only been attempted.

Ugh I'm going off on a tangent. Dice rolls, dice rolls, dice rolls.

Ultimately I think the roll method used depends largely on how it balances out with the other mechanics out in place. If there's frequent credit handouts then a more random system is perfectly fine. The biggest issue with any roll system is perceived unfairness, which can only really be fully negated by removing rolls altogether.

Ninjad

To add my opinion on what eS said, I can see a single roll allowing better means of balance through the GM. For some reason players want minimal GM intervention, but if, say, one nation is having issues with resources, a low roll design can still be made cheap, allowing at least some staying power for that side.

Why arms race GMs are viewed differently than any other GM is beyond me, and is a bit interesting to me.

[NUKE9.13]

Can someone give me a basic ruleset for an Arms Race game?

Most ARs have the basic rules in their core thread OP. If you're looking for a template, most people won't mind if you copy their rules and edit them to your liking, provided you mention your sources.

[Draignean]

Can someone give me a basic ruleset for an Arms Race game?

AR Quickstart
Gameplay is in 2-3 Major phases
Phase 1: Both sides write designs and vote on them in some manner. The DM then comments on the results of the designs at the end of this phase.
Phase 1.5: (Optional) Both sides write revisions and vote on them in some manner. The DM then comments on the results of the revisions at the end of this phase.
Phase 2: DM then comments on the outcomes of any combat encounters between the various sides. Go to phase 1.

That's really it. What kind of dice, how many rolls, combat deployments, all that is just bolted on. The above is the primary loop of all AR games. Like Nuke said, if you want specific examples you can go to the directory (page 1 of this thread) and look at the first post of any core game thread.

[Tyrant Leviathan]

Was thinking of a game where the teams are actually on the same side/killing same die. But are competeting as to how it should be done/ by the numbers. Set in epic science fantasy/space opera. As the teams try to outdo each other in approval until either the Holy Empire Of Humanity prevails or falls.

[evictedSaint]

If you wanted to do something like that, a Monopoly-style game might be the way to go.

Both sides competing for the same contracts, with a budget and design team.  Maybe...what, three contracts pop up per turn? Two cheap and easy ones, and one tougher and pricier one.  You bid on the contracts, then you have to fulfill it.  The goal is to drive the other side out of business.

[Tyrant Leviathan]

Yeah. As the Empire has 8 enemies and must be dealt with so each turn aside designing. One picks “jobs” and stuff. Results, dictate plot.

Also multiple general symbol and SG style interventions that bring new units into Fold (their gear though, dependent of choice, role, and research)

Land combat, wet work, and fleet battles.

[Parsely]

It actually sounds like a better measure of success than the battle reports. It's easy to judge designs on their own or in the context of other designs, it's far more time consuming, subjective, and difficult to convince people of your interpretation of how it's used in a realistic war. It also opens some interesting narrative and creative paths because weapons aren't always designed because there's a practical need, sometimes there are politics going on (ex. design this groundbreaking guided missile but make sure it's only compatible with Navy planes).

[Tyrant Leviathan]

Yeah that’s the idea. To be opposing design teams who still wish to win humanities wars, but the factors are.

1: Want to look better than other team for more sweet bragging rights, cash, and jobs.

2: The said  enemies are way, way different from each other. So a really hard time trying to think of something for them as a whole. So become specialists in slaying certain ones.

[Tyrant Leviathan]

Additional note: 2-4 possible camps. ( Basing off WH40k)

The Legions- Space Marines.
Hands of the Lord- Religionous fighters.
Gaias Shield:  Imperial Guard
Vulcans Hammer: Tech priests.

Also 7 or 8 enemies all themed.

Also starts off as a suggestion game in adding fluff to said empire.


Bonus stuff shows up and based on team answer is results.


Edit:

Also thinking fictional ww2 setting ( players agree to which side their on and well rival design teams working for said side.) 3 sides in that game.

Or something akin to Wands Race, just well dealing with more stuff.

( Got design team names for that. Named after supernatural beasties.)

Also in wand race inspired one, one enemy is land locked neighbor, the other is over seas.

Also  the npc will be generals using said toys. If they fail in their rolls, get replaced and “your” team elects next guy.


Final note: The npc enemy/it’s in this game? They develop their own stuff too with time to shake things up. ( they are bond by die rules like anyone else.)

[Parsely]

2: The said  enemies are way, way different from each other. So a really hard time trying to think of something for them as a whole. So become specialists in slaying certain ones.

I might even go so far as to just say forget simulating the enemy, running two teams is already too much work and now you don't have a stable of players who are feeding the enemy new designs. Make the enemy vague and just say they always are keeping up with your gear in some way. Instead of trying to define the enemy's entire arsenal just identify a particular challenge that needs to be overcome and put a turn limit on it.

[Sensei]

If you wanted to do something like that, a Monopoly-style game might be the way to go.

Both sides competing for the same contracts, with a budget and design team.  Maybe...what, three contracts pop up per turn? Two cheap and easy ones, and one tougher and pricier one.  You bid on the contracts, then you have to fulfill it.  The goal is to drive the other side out of business.

I've seen a couple games like that, I did one taht was sci-fi themed and I've seen at least one that was based around manufacturing weapons in a modern setting. Mine collapsed and so did the other one I've seen, you really need to figure out your math and rules well beforehand, it tolerates less "winging it" than some other systems because you've got to account for all the, well, accounting.

[Tyrant Leviathan]

Hmmm. Keep the enemy vague.

That works.

And yes Stellar Lefioons the original I mercy killed because despite getting four arms races done at a time, one player asked for resources. Which caused me to go berserk.

There will be no real resource/points stuff. Just units rewarded (that I wrote up already) and well the design team gear defines the rest.


As for accounting, have you seen Orbiter? I keep track of population/ resources of four PC tribes each turn, notable npcs, and about to have a generation thing so more people/stuff.

That does not bother me. It is lack of people that usually kills my stuff.

Currently blessed in current projects.

That and I play my YouTube mix tape to inspire/rise to the occasion.

So yeah I could have done it if no berserk. As now I do the number crunch.

But number crunch only in Pangaea games ( as you run lives of peoples/cultures)

My Arms Race is just people killing people with unlimited resources. So no crunch. The deal is if you mess up, high command gives you less.

( I mean 40k. You got countless worlds and countless people. That’s not a issue noir it should be.)

[Tyrant Leviathan]

Happy 4th all and well three things.

1: Renaming Dragon Legion.

2: The Resources In said 40k game are limitless unless lose ton of worlds, and “speciality” stuff will come into play. Plus suggestion game choices make new units (each faction starts off with units, depends on said one.) Naval/space ships, a size chart, design your own ships. And I decided the only “materials worth accounting” are speciality/gift stuff. Say exotic metals for crafting and such.

3: Will only do die rolls to decide what enemies exist, in original I rolled for almost everything, it was out of synch in Having magic powered ships while grunts had plain ole bullets.


Also not actually starting this until have my zip disc file place. Left it at my girlfriends home and visiting her in August. (Due to college stuff.$

[Parsely]

Has anyone ever done or thought about not allowing people to change their votes and how that would affect gameplay?

[Rockeater]

Sounds bad