Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

Hand to hand combat and Ranged Weapons

 Post subject: Hand to hand combat and Ranged Weapons
PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 1:43 pm 
Offline
Unctuous Toady
Unctuous Toady
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 12:06 am
Posts: 3736
Location: Roaming the Eastern Fringe
How important should hand to hand combat be in a miniature game? I think that weapon range has a lot to do with this, as does movement. In 40K most basic weapons have always shot 24 inches. This makes for pretty close range shooting. What if the average rifle type weapon could shoot 36 inches? How would that effect the game?

If you had a game where units walked 5 inches per turn and ran 10 inches, but their basic weapons shot 36 inches what would happen? Would you have more people sticking to cover and less hand to hand?


Truckler

_________________
Venator wrote:
The game designers themselves know these values are not realistic and they do not intend them to replace or invalidate the fluff. So let's get on with our lives and not fixate over the cosmic ramifications of game mechanics which we already know are streamlined for larger forces at the expense of detail.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 11:07 pm 
Offline
Master Sergeant
Master Sergeant

Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 1:21 am
Posts: 1545
Well, let's see. If your unit ran 8 inches per turn, it'd take 3 turns to travel from the edge of a 24 inch rifle range to CC. If the rifle ranges was 36 inches and you ran 10 inches per turn, it'd take 4 turns of running. Assuming that you began the game outside of rifle range, then CC would likely play a smaller factor, because it takes longer to get into range. Simple math.

_________________
All comments are from a 2ed 40k/1ed Necro viewpoint.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 9:09 am 
Offline
Unctuous Toady
Unctuous Toady
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 12:06 am
Posts: 3736
Location: Roaming the Eastern Fringe
Animus, all your math looks dead on. But your example is too simplistic. What about terrain? Are you fighting on an endless plain devoid of any terrain features or cover?

Anyway I think you are missing the point. The question isn't: Would longer weapon ranges make hand to hand combat less effect Yes or No. What I'm asking is "how would it effect the game as a whole" and "would that be a good thing".

It's an essay question not a true or false question. ;)


Truckler

_________________
Venator wrote:
The game designers themselves know these values are not realistic and they do not intend them to replace or invalidate the fluff. So let's get on with our lives and not fixate over the cosmic ramifications of game mechanics which we already know are streamlined for larger forces at the expense of detail.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 10:39 pm 
Offline
Master Sergeant
Master Sergeant

Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 1:21 am
Posts: 1545
Truckler wrote:
Animus, all your math looks dead on. But your example is too simplistic. What about terrain? Are you fighting on an endless plain devoid of any terrain features or cover?


Assuming that you had the same ratio of terrain to open space with either system, then it doesn't matter.

Truckler wrote:
What I'm asking is "how would it effect the game as a whole" and "would that be a good thing".


All other things being equal, there would be less CC and more shooting. And I think it would be a bad thing, but that's a matter of opinion. I like a lot of CC.

Is that more what you were looking for?

_________________
All comments are from a 2ed 40k/1ed Necro viewpoint.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 14, 2006 2:20 pm 
Offline
Cadet
Cadet
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:48 am
Posts: 42
I think that there are three sort of interdependant qualities here.

Basically what is the balance between the effectiveness of ranged weapons, hand to hand combat, and movement. It is like the quality triangle I think. You can tug it in all different directions and get all different kinds of variations.

For instance, if you made hand to hand combat extremely powerful and movement very weak, then perhaps shooting would rule the game.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 14, 2006 11:10 pm 
Offline
Master Sergeant
Master Sergeant

Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 1:21 am
Posts: 1545
The problem is that Truckler is asking one thing, but assuming we'll answer a whole bunch of other questions too. If he wanted to know about terrain and the effectiveness of shooting vs. CC he should specify that. If you don't specify otherwise, I'll assume that all other parts of the theorized game would remain the same. If you don't, why should I assume that there would be terrain at all? Or that there would be CC at all? Or even combat in general? Perhaps Truckler was envisioning a completely non-violent minatures game? The object could be something similar to "tag".

_________________
All comments are from a 2ed 40k/1ed Necro viewpoint.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 3:32 am 
Offline
Master Gunner
Master Gunner

Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 6:56 am
Posts: 293
If you could implement hidden movement then HTH would be much more effective. Looking back at the ol' Rogue Trader rules and comparing that with our GMless gameplay these things were expensive and useless.

But HTH would be very relevant. Especially if there was a system where you can include supply difficulties. Has anyone tried to include this? Think in war realistically you'd go for their supply lines and other targets and not direct assaults. What if Space Marines hit the Orc water supply or their power generators? What happens if they're successful? How can you depict an ammo shortage because the Harlequins wasted the Space Marine supply convoy?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 9:59 am 
Offline
Sergeant
Sergeant

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 2:40 pm
Posts: 773
My experience with Necromunda (and Vor, and to an extent 40k) indicates that the balance of HtH vs shooting depends heavily on the amount of terrain / cover present, and the type of movment allowed.
If advancing upon the enemy while remaining in cover is easy, HtH armies, or ones with short range guns that are powerful and accurate, are very strong. In an open field, long range guns win out- the longer, the better.
But that's not really any surprise is it?
Simpley comparing range of guns to speed of movment also ignores the factors of weapon accuracy, rof, and power. A gun with short range can still stop an assault fairly easily if its accurate, powerful, and has a high rof.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 12:23 pm 
Offline
Unctuous Toady
Unctuous Toady
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 12:06 am
Posts: 3736
Location: Roaming the Eastern Fringe
Humongus wrote:
My experience with Necromunda (and Vor, and to an extent 40k) indicates that the balance of HtH vs shooting depends heavily on the amount of terrain / cover present, and the type of movment allowed.
If advancing upon the enemy while remaining in cover is easy, HtH armies, or ones with short range guns that are powerful and accurate, are very strong. In an open field, long range guns win out- the longer, the better.
But that's not really any surprise is it?


I hear what you are saying about the amount of cover and terrain on the board. But I don't see that as an innate feature of the rules themselves. The amount of terrain used in games will vary from campaign to campaign and from gaming group to gaming group. The rules could suggest a certain level of terrain for games, but then the rules are starting to dictate how that game is played, which I find to be a bad situation.

Suppose that the players had agreed to fight a campaign on a bleak desert world. Then in that case flat and mostly barren battlefields would be appropriate. Then again, if the campaign were to feature battles on a lush jungle planet, then that would call for much more terrain. Either way, the basic rules still impose a certain value on the effectiveness of shooting versus hand to hand (and as Outlander mentioned movement as well).

In Necromunda (and 40K 2nd edition) your chances of being effective in shooting versus melee are approximately equal. However, in Rogue Trader the hand to hand combat system was different. In Rogue Trader if two combatants had equal weapon skills then they each needed to roll a 5+ on D6 to hit one another (and then they still had to wound and contend with armor). This makes hand to hand combat less reliable and less effective. Most troops (unless they are melee specialists) would rather avoid hand to hand combat at all costs simply because they end up becoming bogged down for many turns, even if they eventually win.

I think that 40K, perhaps unrealisticaly, gives hand to hand too much power. In the far future shooting should rule the day. But I realise that 40k is more about heroic battles in a fantasy setting than some simulation of futuristic combat.



PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 3:32 am Post subject:
If you could implement hidden movement then HTH would be much more effective. Looking back at the ol' Rogue Trader rules and comparing that with our GMless gameplay these things were expensive and useless.

Kharille wrote:
But HTH would be very relevant. Especially if there was a system where you can include supply difficulties. Has anyone tried to include this? Think in war realistically you'd go for their supply lines and other targets and not direct assaults. What if Space Marines hit the Orc water supply or their power generators? What happens if they're successful? How can you depict an ammo shortage because the Harlequins wasted the Space Marine supply convoy?


I think this is more a question regarding playing campaigns, something that I am a BIG proponent of! Campaigns make your games more realistic and discourage cheesy attrition based tactics that flourish in tournament style games. But campaigns, and how to make them really cool, is the subject for another thread (maybe in the 40K or whatever section is relevant to the game being played).


Truckler

_________________
Venator wrote:
The game designers themselves know these values are not realistic and they do not intend them to replace or invalidate the fluff. So let's get on with our lives and not fixate over the cosmic ramifications of game mechanics which we already know are streamlined for larger forces at the expense of detail.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 5:16 pm 
Offline
Sergeant
Sergeant

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 2:40 pm
Posts: 773
Truckler wrote:
I hear what you are saying about the amount of cover and terrain on the board. But I don't see that as an innate feature of the rules themselves. The amount of terrain used in games will vary from campaign to campaign and from gaming group to gaming group.


I wasn't saying otherwise. Rather, my point was that the rules system only governs the balance so much. Heck, even just player's perception can have a big impact. If people think shooting is more powerful, and never bother with hth, then hth is going to be "weak".
One of my best "strategic moves" when playing Necromunda was to build an assload of terrain and bring it with me to our campaign days. My Goliath gang (armed with lots of shotguns and pistols) did amazingly well, but few other people changed their gang setups, and you didn't see a lot of hth fights / short range shooting in other people's games.
Though I must say, even my gangs put more people own with shooting than hth, and the shooting was much more tactically important; hth was a finishing move.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

cron

Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group