Desired current sci fi wargaming trends

[Dentatus]

Stargrunt 2 was the first time I'd ever seen polyhedral dice and die-type shifts used in a game. I thought it was brilliant.

That said, my perception of the current trend is it's moving toward generic/miniature agnostic games, with a focus on skirmishes and small unit actions. Maybe some lite RPG elements.

Could be that's what I see 'cause that's what I'm looking for, but mass battles with larger scale miniatures (28mm) strike me as expensive, time consuming, demanding big play-area requirements. Nice spectacle, but not practical for most busy hobbyists who have other obligations.

I think folks partial to large, combined arms battles are shifting to small scales like 6, 10, 15mm, even 20mm. They're easier on the wallet proportionally, and don't require the same space.

[cahrn]

On the different dice thing, I think I saw a game where models all had the same stats but rolled different dice depending on how powerful they were? So say your target number was a 3+ a scroat might get a d4 whereas captain mcdoogle fancy pants might roll a d20, ring any bells? Probably something on ash barkers YouTube channel? I like the simplicity of the idea.

I've seen it implemented a few times before, as others have mentioned in this thread. My group has yet to find anything that balances dice mechanics, crunch, interesting list building, etc. to perfectly meet our druthers.

[salcor]

Everyone thanks for the responses.  I have just been wondering what people think about sci fi wargaming and what makes a good game.  What I have seen is that 40k/GW continue to dominate the market with a few notable entries like Legion Making an appearance.  Unfortunately the data points to army scale tournament driving community that seems to set the culture at most stores and other games pop up as an outlier.  I was hopeful that Antares was going to be bigger than it is, but they had too slow a release schedule.  It will be interesting to see how things change if the tarriffs happen. 

Salcor

Salcor

[mcfonz]

It's not new. Star Grunt used sliding die sizes. My grunts use d8s, Regulars, d10s and Heroes d12s.

Fire and Fury did the same but for ACW.

[jetengine]

I just want a dirt simple mecha game but they dont seem to exist.

[Cat]

I just want a dirt simple mecha game but they dont seem to exist.

I’ve been very happy with BattleTech Alpha Strike, it’s the update the game needed 25 years ago.

[wkeyser]

Take a look at Core Space, I know it lists itself as a board game but the potential is there.

I also thought rouge stars would scratch that itch but missed by a mile with the d20 mechanic. Core Space has every thing each figure is customizable and each is assigned a class (soldier, crew, enhanced, etc and each has diferent abilites). The figures are really nice not the over bulked out 40K clones. But what is great is the way the game focres you to cooperate with your opponent on occasion but against the ever increasing alien threat. Some times you even just have to cut and run back to your ship so you dont loss your guys. Some times you even have to bribe your opponent to take you on his ship, it has happened to us a couple of times.

What I like about it is that it has lots of depth without having to spend hours figuring out equipment types and combinations.

Think of it kind of like you are the crew of the Firefly and trying to get ahead, taking on missions and constantly haveing to pay for ship repairs.

The added bonus of fantastic terrain is just icing on the cake..



One of the great aspects of the game is the trader dash board.


Here is the link to them.  https://shop.battlesystems.co.uk/

[boywundyrx]

I just want a dirt simple mecha game but they dont seem to exist.

Mech Attack is probably the simplest, and Samurai Robot Battle Royale isn't far behind (or ahead).

Chris

[Metternich]

I like hard science fiction - Traveller, Stargrunt, etc. - vice space opera.  Don't like the Warhammer 40K fantasy-based type versions of the future.  I also don't like generic rules-sets of the sort that Osprey has been going to, where the mechanics and game design are so similar whether the game is medieval, pirate, or the future.   The game should be grounded in its background material.

[Dentatus]

"A game should be grounded in its background material."

Sure, the game should reflect the setting but how many workable,efficacious miniature game/dice mechanisms are there before deja vu sets in?

I mean you can introduce any resolution mechanism, from flipping coins to tiddlywinks, but I've encountered a number of games that introduce 'unique' mechanics that end up being tedious or proprietary. "you have to buy our custom measuring gauges/special dice/cards/tokens/27.43mm bases..."

[has.been]

Rogue Stars has some good points, but seems to be aimed at having just about 4 figures
and using them a lot, so that you understand how your team works. Added to that is
a lot of fusing about to point things up. This is no good for reducing my lead mountain.
For 28mm I use Galactic Heroes. I can paint up whatever takes my fancy with little fuss.

I was, and still am, looking for a fun (squad based) set of rules for my 15mm collection.
Nothing so far, but I hope the Sci-Fi version of Dragon Rampant will do the job.

[CookAndrewB]

I like hard science fiction - Traveller, Stargrunt, etc. - vice space opera.  Don't like the Warhammer 40K fantasy-based type versions of the future.  I also don't like generic rules-sets of the sort that Osprey has been going to, where the mechanics and game design are so similar whether the game is medieval, pirate, or the future.   The game should be grounded in its background material.

I actually agree with this to some extent. I think the mechanics of combat, most specifically but not the only aspect impacted, change as technology develops. There is a big difference in hitting a group of soldiers with a ACW era cannon, vice a WWII bomb; and another leap forward so something like a missile strike from a predator drone. What comes next, in the future, would most certainly improve on accuracy, the ability to engage multiple targets simultaneously, etc. Those are big changes in warfare.

While I don't care to play WH40K for personal financial reasons, I do like to read the books. If the books are the best indicator of how flawless a soldier a Space Marine is, the chance that they would miss an intended target is pretty limited, right? Advanced targeting, heightened senses and awareness, lack of fear and a battlefield survivability that shows marines carrying on a fight (dealing lethal blows to an enemy) while having half their body blown apart and mangled. That changes mechanics like suppression, route, etc.

Of course, all bets are off if you look at something like Star Wars where the galaxy is conquered, and defended, by myopic soldiers who can't hit the broad side of a barn even in tight quarters.   

Somewhere, recently, I read an overview of a rule set (space opera/distant future sci-fi) that assumed all shots fired would be hits. The game only resolved the effect of a hit, not whether it happened. At first I rolled my eyes, but as I got to thinking about it I figured it might not be that wrong. At least for something like an elite/well drilled soldier. I think that mechanics start to look like deja vu, because we see the world through our limited perspective. We assume that shots fired will miss, and perhaps that makes games interesting. We assume that soldiers shot at won't charge headlong into certain death (or at least assume that some heroic test of wills would be needed to do so). We assume that many centuries into the future we will still have guns with bullets and magazines, even if they are bigger and sport skulls and shoot exploding rounds. All of that assumes a very 20-21st century understanding of warfare, and so long as you start from that perspective I think you will always see a few similar ways to skin the cat. 

[Easy E]

Somewhere, recently, I read an overview of a rule set (space opera/distant future sci-fi) that assumed all shots fired would be hits. The game only resolved the effect of a hit, not whether it happened. At first I rolled my eyes, but as I got to thinking about it I figured it might not be that wrong. At least for something like an elite/well drilled soldier. I think that mechanics start to look like deja vu, because we see the world through our limited perspective. We assume that shots fired will miss, and perhaps that makes games interesting. We assume that soldiers shot at won't charge headlong into certain death (or at least assume that some heroic test of wills would be needed to do so). We assume that many centuries into the future we will still have guns with bullets and magazines, even if they are bigger and sport skulls and shoot exploding rounds. All of that assumes a very 20-21st century understanding of warfare, and so long as you start from that perspective I think you will always see a few similar ways to skin the cat.

I tried to make a far future game once where weapons were powerful enough to eat through cover and had unlimited range.  The main challenge was penetration vs. armor, facing, and detection/non-detection.  It ended up being really boring to play as there were no tactics to it.  Why bother doing anything other than shooting away at long range?  There was no reason.  I had to go back and re-jigger the detection/non-detection a lot more to encourage movement rather than discourage it. 

I submit, that a designer needs to think more about how to stimulate fire and maneuver, and tactical gameplay in a sci-fi game and make the fluff fit the needs of the game to be fun.

[Elbows]

I know the thread title says "Wargame", and most games we play are indeed just that, wargames.

Sci-fi though, more than other genre, lends itself to non-fighting action though.  If that's something you desire, that's a totally different ballpark.  If you are doing a Star Trek-esque game, or something of that sort, it may be based on collecting data, performing experiments, diplomacy, etc. etc. vs. "how well can I shoot this other fellow.".

Games like that take a lot more time and effort to produce.

One thing to take solace in is that you're unlikely to reinvent the wheel.  It's also not necessary unless you stumble on something terribly fun and it catches on.  I currently sell only one of my games (an Old West title), though I have numerous games I've built for fun.  I frequently get people saying "Oh, so the mechanic is like ________?" and they mention some game I've never heard of.  There's not much you can do with dice, tokens or cards that hasn't existed on the tabletop somewhere.

There are a number of reasons people buy games, so you just need to nail one or two of them to have some basic selling capacity:

1) Nostalgia
2) Gorgeous artwork, design
3) Clever gameplay
4) Intuitive and smooth gameplay
5) Fun gameplay
6) Cheap rules
7) Simple but intuitive rules
Complex and "deep" rules
9) Gorgeous models (if you're doing models with your game)
10) Great suitability for preferred playstyle (co-op, competitive, narrative, etc.)

Ideally you hit 5-6 of those, but people buy games for loads of reasons.  I've bought rule sets because they were cheap, or because they had awesome art, or because I loved the IP (even if the game sucked).  Sometimes just because I trusted the publisher and thought "how bad can it be".  Sometimes I want a fun beer and pretzels game, and sometimes I want to get stuck in to a 4 hour nail-biting game.

There's so much scope in sci-fi, I think you just choose what you enjoy...and make the best game you can.  Don't try to be everything at once, or it'll probably fail.  I admit my primary goal when someone buys my product is very simply that they don't feel like they wasted their money (i.e. quality components, well written rules).  I've paid money for some rules PDFs that have been...shockingly lazily assembled/written, and that's never fun.

[DivisMal]

It's not new. Star Grunt used sliding die sizes. My grunts use d8s, Regulars, d10s and Heroes d12s.

Afaik it was first employed by Deadlands: The Great Railwars a rather excellent skirmish system, which sadly never took off, and imo suffered from too many crazy models instead of focusing on Wild West. The engine now lives on in the Savage World group of RPGs which can also be used very well for tabletop skirmish games.