PMC 2640 - new sci-fi ruleset

[Mr. Peabody]

I wonder if I haven't told too much. 

Nope. That's exactly the sort of bait that works for me as a teaser. Keep it up; we need to see under the hood.

[workerBee]

<snip>
Each unit is described by 7 parameters and special rules (if it has any), while weapons don't have separate descriptions. <snip>
Similarly, the vehicles are divided into general types: recon, tanks, APCs, SPGs, etc. But whether your SPAAG is armed with autocannons, laser guns or missiles and whether it is tracked, wheeled or hovering is up to you (though there are optional rules for differentiating between the propulsions).

For some this makes the game less sci-fi, but I personally like how it turned out - easy to learn and fast to play.

<snip>

Interesting view.

Even Baccus' Command Horizon (see https://www.baccus6mm.com/includes/products/sf/chrules.php for desciption) which plays at the Battalion Commander level differentiates between broad weapon types.  This set of rules is aimed at a lower level - "It's a "true company" size, 1:1 scale game for 15-28mm miniatures."

In Command Horizon there is still a difference at the more corporate level of play/command, which seems appropriate.

From the link above:


"Weapons and Equipment

The basic tripartite division of long range offensive weapons includes the current options of projectile firing guns and missile systems, along with that staple of SF gaming and literature, a ‘ray gun’.  In this edition of Command Horizon, you will find that there is no real differentiation between the effect of Guns and Beams. This is purely a temporary state as future developments will see both being more closely defined with their own strengths and weaknesses.Launchers have the great advantage of not having their firing affected by blocked line of sight, but are subject to greater interference from ECM."

There may be no need to differentiate between Blaster Pistol, Blaster carbine, and Blaster Rifle like the old FGU Space Marine Rules (which was a small skirmish to skirmish level game system) did but I do believe the differences between weapons at the level this rules are aimed is doable without excessive detail.

Removing any differentiation between weapons systems seems like saying that there is no difference between an AK-47 and a musket.

Gracias,

Glenn

[workerBee]

The counters are mostly, if not only, used to mark Suppression/Damage Points. A unit can have up to 12 of these, so dice are the best solution IMO.
<snip>

So, twelve points of damage/suppression means... is there a practical or significant  difference between the impact of 1 pip or two pips?  6 and 7?  10 and 11?  How does this compare to "steady/disordered/disrupted/shaken/routed" system?  Does a unit capability degrade as points collect or is it a case of you perform as usual until a 'tipping' point is reached then 'catastrophic effects' are incurred or somewhere inbetween?

Gracias,

Glenn

[MKG]

So let's say you have Rifle squads: they can have assault rifles, laser rifles, neutron rifles, pulse rifles and so on. We consider that they have similar Firepower (which in-game is the combination of accuracy, stopping power, rate of fire as similar factors) and Range. Anyway something which looks like the rifles and works like the rifles on the future battlefield.
You have assault squads - the units intended for attacking enemy positions at close range - they may have SMGs, shotguns, carbines, flamethrowers, microwave pistols and other weapons for "close encounters" (or mix od them).
Of course, there is the difference in weapons but from the point of view of the whole team. Weapons differ in Firepower, Range and Special rules which clearly shows the unit character. We simply do not play in individual soldiers gear, need not to look with model to remove and guess it this weapon is plasma rifle, laser rifle of cool-looking Sci-Fi musket (especially "interesting" in 15mm or lower scale). Also it allows to use multi-figure bases using simple, optional rule.

Remember that all parameters are given for the whole team, not individual soldiers with all respects later in the rules (e.g. one soldier see the target - whole team see it, one have the range all have the range - bullets rather not disappear because fly a few metres more, aren't they?).

I know that not everybody will like this approach, but you cannot make the game for everyone. I love it so I included it in the game. Despite the simplifity of the system you really feel the difference between the units types.

12 suppression points are enought to break the harderst guys
The system is simple: unit gets more than it's morale (waring normally from 3 to 5) it's suppressed, more than twice it's broken and more trice it out of action. Of course the troops rally, but losses lower the morale, so decimated troops has little combat value.

To summarize: PMC 2640 is the game for real men! It's like a strong coffee, rare steak or glass of pure, frozen vodka. Sophisticated special rules, long rule paragraph, multiplication of entities and similar frills are for sissies!

[Sarmor]

If anyone's interested, you can already preorder the rulebook: http://assaultpublishing.com/?p=982

[Mr. Peabody]

How much will the .pdf cost?

[MKG]

Just old school rulebook on the sale.

[Sarmor]

How much will the .pdf cost?

No official statement, but the rulebook will soon be released as a pdf, costing 66PLN (about 21$ / 13£).

[Mr. Peabody]

That's good news, thank you. We definitely want to give this a try, without first overloading the groaning bookshelves at home.

[Sarmor]

And here it is: http://assaultpublishing.com/?p=1216

[Mr. Peabody]

Thank you! Ordered!

[MKG]

Thank you. I hope you like 

[Jan]

Hi,

DEMO and Mini-Expansion for free:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bx4Zk-KqxaMoVllzNGZHN0xjZlk/edit

Anyone played this game several times and can say something about it?

Greetings,
Jan

[Sarmor]

As a play-tester, I can say they are easy to grasp and play really smoothly. With the broad range of units, it appears there are many possible army builds, though I personally haven't tested them all (but don't worry, it doesn't mean they weren't tested at all ).
Shooting is superior to close combat, so you should be careful when composing your army - a bunch of short-ranged units, no matter how powerful, will usually be shot up before they have a chance to shoot/fight, so either mount them in transports or use only for a specific scenario (e.g. Invasion, where your units land from the orbit). And you definitely need more LoS-blocking terrain than in Wh40k.
Furthermore, there are some units which might seem a bit too powerful (snipers, 'tank destroyers' - though actually they are just easy to use thanks to their long shooting range), but you just have to find a way to deal with them (artillery, quick assaults, air units).
What the game lacks is a more complicated command mechanism (think Chain of Command), but it's just a matter of taste - either you prefer to have total control over your units (that's the case with PMC 2640) or a more random game.
Solo scenarios and campaign rules make a really nice and interesting addition, and I'd love to play a campaign - but for that I'll have to convince my two usual opponents, which might be tricky (one will probably try to make a sci-fi version of CoC, the other has recently bought Victory Decision: Future Combat, which is... different).

[Dargoth]

the other has recently bought Victory Decision: Future Combat, which is... different).

That'd be me.

As for PMC 2640 (I played 2 beta games and one after release.  (all with Sarmor)) it's a simple little game and if simplicity is your thing you might give it a try. Unfortunately the game has a rather big flaw for me. Unit balance - there is no points system, you get X units of Tier Y (read the demo to find out more).
Some units are better than others, WAY better actually (like those damn snipers,mortars,TDs,flying stuff). So scenarios have to be build with great care.
Yes even with point systems you can min-max a more optimal list but trust me you can really screw yourself in this system. Our last battle reminded me of my first tabletop game ever (AFAIR) - WFB (O&G + Chaos (both mostly infantry) vs HE + Dwarfs (stand and shoot) on a 48"x72" table. For reasons last to time we decided to play it lengthwise (after the battle we concluded that that was not the best idea  ). Only one of our units made it to the "end" (C&C) Chosen Warriors of Khorne though they managed to overrun one unit and kill the other the battle ended)
As for the campaign rules and sp games: haven't read them.
I would still recommend to give the demo (it's free after all) a try, you might like it.