Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Age of Myths, Gods and Empires => Topic started by: Oldben1 on August 09, 2013, 02:43:56 AM
-
So after much debate, and pouring over the large amount of gladiator arenas I 've decided to dip my toe in the water. I don't like the look of hexes. As anyone tried taking a hex based rule system and substituted inches instead? I don't mind the gladiators based on hexes, but I'd like the ground to be flat sand. The problem is a lot of rules seemed to be based on the position of figures relative to the player in the next hex. Would inches leave too much for interpretation? I like The rule sets Familia and Munera Sine. Does anyone have some advice?
Thanks!
-
Unfortunately, I don't think you can have your cake and eat it too my friend. :(
The hexes are there for a purpose after all.
As far as Blood on the Sands goes at the moment, hexes could theoretically be replaced with inches, but personally the whole thing would be messy. There should never be any doubt whether your gladiator will reach his opponent or be short half an inch or so.
-
I think it's a simple result of the amount of detail which goes into most gladiator games, which are generally very small personal skirmish games. Unlike larger games where you're simply rolling X number of dice vs. Y number of dice, etc. The detail in most gladiator games involves specific pieces of armor, facing, helmet vision, etc. There are some very nice "subdued" hexes done on various threads on this board though.
Oddly, I find the hexes a bit refreshing. Adds a bit of board-game style charm to the games. I suppose if the game was very very simple you could do away with the hexes...but then you're losing a lot of point of the game.
-
I don't like hexes either, so when I get to my arena they'll be very low contrast... enough to see them when you need them, but not obtrusive.
-
I hate hexes as well. They're the reason I didn't buy Dreadball.
There are many things you can do about the issue, some of which depend on the ruleset. I don't know these rules so I can't offer very specific advice, but here are some general guidelines:
- use hex bases on your figures if the relative position of base-to-base figures is important
- likewise, if the rules have turning by the hexside, hex bases make this easy
- use spare hex bases to regulate movement
- to get around measuring errors, introduce "snap to contact" rules for figures less than, say, half a hex apart
You could just convert everything into quarters and 45/90 degree angles. Those are much easier to eyeball than hexsides and 60 degree angles. Usually this doesn't change the game all that much.
You can also drop the hex lines from the map and instead mark the center of each hex. Each figure then stands on top of one mark and faces one of the 6 nearest ones. Works just like hexes but looks a whole lot less messy.
-
They sound like pretty intelligent options to me. Marking the centers instead sounds like an easy out - but I fear it may still not look aesthetically pleasing.
-
You could go for the Bloodbowl solution - mark the corners of each space (ok, for hexes that would be vertices rather than corners) as unobtrusively as you like. Dots, or three very short lines in a starburst to show the continuation of the edges, or whatever.
Personally I rather like the boardgame aesthetic and am going for fairly high contrast hex edging. De gustibus... :)
-
Well it sounds like hexes simplify the game, which is really what I'm looking for. Maybe I just need to refine my hex/sand technique. Thanks for all the advice.
-
Hold a transparent template marked with hexes over the top of the area; above the figures.
-
I suppose you could try 'squexes' that's a square gridded board with rows half overlapped - sort of like brickwork. This gives each square six adjacent squares so sort of like hexes but not.
However, I suspect that your real objection is not to 'hexes', but to 'gridded boards'! In which case you need a non grid reliant game system.
-
However, I suspect that your real objection is not to 'hexes', but to 'gridded boards'! In which case you need a non grid reliant game system.
Yes. Squares are a little bit easier to hide but essentially it's the same thing.
The objection is twofold:
1) Objection against the restrictions
For many people, the thing with miniature games is the freedom of movement. You can place your units exactly where you want them, and it matters. Squares/hexes/areas destroys this.
2) Objection agasint the aesthetics
Many people want the gaming table to look as real as possible. Having a superimposed grid over everything ruins the impression.
-
You can also drop the hex lines from the map and instead mark the center of each hex. Each figure then stands on top of one mark and faces one of the 6 nearest ones. Works just like hexes but looks a whole lot less messy.
That's exactly what FASA did with Battletroops, the 28mm offshoot of Battletech.
-
Brillianbt ideas maxxon.
Thank you.
I dont like hexes too.
-
That's exactly what FASA did with Battletroops, the 28mm offshoot of Battletech.
SJG's Battlesuit was the first game I saw it in, Battletroops had it and so did the stillborn Shadowrun DMZ game.
There are probably others, very little is truly new under the sun.
-
RSBS doesn't use hexes.
-
^It's also the worst Gladiator game I've played. lol
-
Haha. Really? I've got the rules but have never played them. There is so much differing opinion as to which glad rules are the best its hard to choose one.
-
I like several gladiator rules sets, but Red Sand Blue Sky was...really terribly boring. Now I've only played them once, and maybe digging into them and changing them up might work, but it was really quite bad. lol
Wasn't a huge fan of Victus either (I think that's the name) but it was a bit confusing. Might be salvageable. Currently I prefer BOTS and then Arena Games is good fun when you want to run a bunch of gladiators around the ring at the same time.
-
I've yet to find a Gladiator game yet that wasn't just die rolling.
-
Try Jugula? It's just cards. ;)
-
Lol. Ahhh guys, your killing it for me. lol
-
I've yet to find a Gladiator game yet that wasn't just die rolling.
Yes, it is a difficult subject.
Man-to-Man (predecessor to GURPS) is probably the best game for duels I know of, though even that is not without its problems. But it does have sensible tactical movement, and not the "exploit flaws in initiative system to do a runaround attack" stuff most rules suffer from. Sadly hex-based, but could be converted.
Then there was that Flintloque dueling game, aptly named The Duel. Again, not without problems and not a whole lot of movement involved.
-
The problem is the subject matter. There is no easy way to put the complex nature of a bad-breath-distance fight between two human-sized opponents onto a map with dice. We're asking an awful lot without the use of a computer or random algorithms/AI etc.
Hexes are simply the most useful movement system outside of measuring inches (which unfortunately becomes very vague and can be abused...particularly angles and turning). I suppose you could develop a system like the very popular Wings of War/X-Wing game mechanic using simple cards/rulers.
Personally I think there are a lot of ways to do it - but none of them will be easy. Before falling in love with BOTS, I was myself, planning to work on a gladiator game. I was going to use hexes, but use card decks for maneuvers...players secretly selecting maneuvers and revealing them simultaneously.
If you don't like hexes there are plenty of ways to subdue the look without being ridiculous. Personally a game like gladiators in 28mm I'm fine with a more board-game style approach. I'd never use hex bases on anything else, but for a small game I'm okay with it.
-
The problem is the subject matter. There is no easy way to put the complex nature of a bad-breath-distance fight between two human-sized opponents onto a map with dice.
There are two very difficult subjects for miniatures gaming: duels and dogfights. Both due to movement but for opposing reasons.
Dogfights are difficult because they are all about positioning and this suits the discrete movement systems of most games very badly. And no, I don't find the X-Wing system ideal either. It gives too little to react to but that's getting off-topic.
The problem with duels is that there really is relatively little meaningful movement. This makes the game look boring and seem like just rolling dice.
Look at sport fencing -- with environmental factors (i.e. terrain) removed, movement in a duel is essentially a one-dimensional affair: all that matters is distance to the opponent. Long range ship to ship combat can get this way too, but again getting off topic.
Rolling high on init to run around your opponent and stabbing him in the back just does not happen in a real duel. Unfortunately in many games the only attack bonus you can get is "rear attack", so the rules make the players constantly try this inane tactic, and due to flaws in init/move system it might actually work reinforcing the idiocy.
MtM/GURPS is fairly good. E.g. you get a defense bonus if you retreat a hex while defending. On flat ground it doesn't mean a whole lot, but with terrain a better fighter can actually pressure his opponent "to the ropes".
It's built on hexes, but could be fairly easily converted into something that uses displacement by one base. It has other problems, but the movement system actually works.