If you found this this thread by searching, it is now obsolete. The new thread is here.So I've had a project rolling around in my mind. Months ago, I thought it'd be cool if the forum had a play-by-post-or-IM-or-IRC Warhammer 40000 league. Two people would submit turns to a Game Master, who would work out the results and manage the board and so forth to keep things honest and moving. Then I thought about the logistics of it, and realized that Warhammer relies so much on specifically measured distances and model placement that the best way to run such a game over an inarticulate medium like the Internet would require systematically fudging the game, perhaps with a hex-based map to eliminate the need for inches. But then I realized what kind of over complications that brought, and scrapped the whole idea. I pondered running the same idea with a simpler game like Necromunda or BrikWars, but I couldn't get around all the things that would have to be altered for streamlining.
Then, I came to the obvious, monstrous conclusion. If I'm going to go to that much work to re-render an existing game playable online, I may as well just make up my own and dump the complications from the get go. So, God help me, I'm making a table-top-wargame. I call it - the
Automatic Annihilation Ængine.
Naturally for a DIY game project, I have no concrete elements in place, but I have a few overarching goals in mind, which I'm sure you'd all love to help me turn into a real game. Above all else, I want to optimize this for playing by forum posts or other static telepresence means. Mostly this means streamlining (though not necessarily simplifying) the rules as much as possible, maybe even writing simple function programs to handle number crunching and table searching. More importantly, it requires the presence of a Game Master, who will handle all the actual die-rolling and bookkeeping, unless you've got two players who really trust each other. But those are just principles, not goals. These goals are things the system needs to do, which I can visualize as achievable, but I need to nail down into real rules.
Firstly and simply, games will be played on a hex-tiled map. In keeping with tradition, gameplay will conceptually revolve around 25mm miniatures, even though nothing is required to physically exist. Each hex is roughly 3-4 inches in diameter, conservatively big enough to hold ten models. Larger models of course take up more space in a hex. Squads composed of multiple models can spread out over contiguous hexes, to a minimum of three 25mm models per hex for coherency. All movement and shooting is based on hexes, so spread-placement is important, as are the number of models in a hex for things like explosions. Close combat will probably involve something like squads piling into and contesting mixed hexes.
Second, players will not make moves on a model-by-model or even side-by-side alternation. Even diehards of the genre acknowledge that this your-turn-my-turn norm is hard to logically justify. More importantly, it can bog down activity, and theoretically give players an unfair advantage because every action is telegraphed in advance. My solution - to speed along the progression of turns and avoid some meta-game tarpits, all player activity will take place simultaneously.
The Hell I hear you say. Each turn, both players will determine what movements and actions they want every unit in their respective army to take, and submit it in secret to the GM. The GM then computes all the results, and posts the layout of the next turn.
This introduces a huge mass of complications, because it fundamentally changes the relationship between the player and the game. Namely, in most games the player is less a general than a hive mind, perfectly aware of all factors and directing all activity. In my system, the player is, by necessity more than ideal, a detached commander, issuing standing orders that he can only hope his army acts on. Not that units will randomly disobey orders or anything, but the player just won't know what's happening until after it's happened, with no recourse to change his mind. Picture these scenarios.
Squad A wants to shoot at Squad B, but Squad B has orders to move out of Squad A's weapon range.
Squad C wants to charge Squad D, but Squad D wants to run somewhere else.
Squad E and Squad F, opponents, are both ordered to move into the same hex.
I'm not exactly sure how to handle these scenarios, but the best idea I've had is an Initiative system - namely units get to think for themselves when presented with situations their orders don't exactly account for. For example: picking a different target, starting a fight, running faster, retreating, milling about in confusion, and other possibilities. I'm picturing dice, modifiers, and tables.
Third and biggest, there is no official setting, fluff, or any army lists at all. Nope. The army lists and their derived armies are designed from the ground up by the players. Models, squads, squad options, squadrons, all the way up. Of course, armies must be given a relative "value" of some kind. In an optimal world, players would just punch numbers into a program, and it would spit out a numeric power value calculated from a holistic appreciation of every element and it's relationship to the whole army, but that's silly. Nonetheless, I do plan for models to be given algorithmic point values, followed by calculations of upgrades and squad constructions, and so forth.
Of course, all of that can only come after the stats and contests thereof are hammered down, but I've got plenty of ideas on how to approach that too. This also requires a lot of effort on the players' parts for original creations, and checking by the GM for security's sake. This in turn would lend itself to smaller armies and lists, which would cut down on bookkeeping work for the GM. However, the system should be able to handle any given army size and complexity, but coherency will follow from restraint.
That's by no means everything I've thought of, not even approaching the unit construction meat and gameplay potatoes of the engine. But that's my initial, impromptu proposal. Let the questions, criticisms, tangential comments, and promise of nebulous assistance fly!
Author
Topic: Aqizzar's Automatic Annihilation Ængine (Read 11196 times)