|
Post by arcticdragongames on Aug 25, 2014 22:50:44 GMT -9
How do you feel about the colors and the left to right orientation of the symbols and values? Counter-based board wargames using hex-maps have long favoured numerals in order of Attack-Defence-Movement, so your system clearly follows in that "tradition". The information is clear enough on both versions of your unit markers regardless of this, and the symbol colours seem fine to me (with normal colour vision). I'm not too sure about the graded blue-to-white marker background though, which looks a little "mechanical" and unreal. Possibly that's because of the "standard" blue colour, however. Does the colour have a game significance? If so, and it relates to the specific unit in some way, perhaps it would be better set up as a vertical oval centred on the figure. If it's a nationality indicator, or indicative of a larger unit designation (regiment or division, say), that may be better achieved with a more uniform background colour to the marker, or a simpler additional symbol. With a print-and-play game, it's helpful if any use of colour makes sense in game terms, and isn't simply to avoid having a (more printer-friendly!) white background. The background color does not have any significance, it was just for looks. I keep replacing ink cartridges, so I am leaning towards a plain white background, but maybe there could be some shrubs down low.
|
|
|
Post by wyvern on Aug 26, 2014 6:43:36 GMT -9
Maybe an irregular-shaped background around the figure/weapon illustration, rather than the simple rectangle used currently (but of course still including the key information and words!), could add "interest" to each marker, rather than using a coloured, or partly illustrated (shrubs), background? That may create problems for the printable page layout though, I realise, plus I'm not sure if the rectangle shape and size is important in game-terms.
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Aug 26, 2014 21:37:40 GMT -9
The rectangle shape and size has no importance for the game other than being easy to print, cut and fold. An irregular shaped background is interesting, perhaps that would make it easier to stick the damage markers on. The concept at this stage is to show damage by putting a red cross on Infantry units and flame/smoke on tanks and artillery. Been using dice to keep track of damage during the beta testing but that is kind of a fiddly technique.
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Sept 4, 2014 13:42:13 GMT -9
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Sept 17, 2014 15:03:06 GMT -9
Play test #26 was an Infantry slugfest of a city fight with 50 units per side. The forces included 3 tank units and 4 armored car units. Tank Shock: WWII will have several battles set in cities. The Battle of Stalingrad will have several scenarios because it was a huge and pivotal battle. The Assault Infantry made good use of their new ability. The latest revision gives them the ability to take the adjacent hex with a free maneuver if they eliminate the enemy. There were two mortars per side but no artillery in this battle, still need to work on some artillery line-of-sight and masking issues. The Red Army squeaked out a narrow victory by using the “Maneuver: Tank Riders” to do a quick insertion of an Engineer unit into the fourth building that the Wehrmacht had been removed from. This was the first battle with the new type of terrain, the “two tab”. Perhaps this is called 1.5-D terrain? Switching from flat tiles to “two tab” tiles makes set up and removal of the modular terrain much easier. Even better, it makes the line of sight easier to visualize and work with. An added bonus is that the two tabs pinch the unit models “billboards” so they are less likely to “wander” if brushed by the accidental low hanging sleeve or whacked by a vigorous roll of the dice. The hexes were also stretched to 2" from flat side to flat side. The scale is 1/120, aka 15mm. The standard unit of Strength 3 represents a platoon. This game also led to splitting a dual option Fire card into two distinct Fire cards: “Fire: Supported Unit” which allows two units to fire on the same target and “Fire: Suppression” which lets the supported unit Maneuver into the range and line of sight of the targeted unit.
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Sept 17, 2014 22:37:15 GMT -9
Oops, forgot to post the Action Card that won the battle for the Red Army. Here is "Maneuver: Tank Riders."
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Oct 4, 2014 22:11:30 GMT -9
In play test session #28 the Partisans were overrun by a Wehrmacht raid, thanks to the relentless usage of the mortar by Jesse Classen. The scenario will be revised and will have the forest terrain closer to the Partisan village. The Partisans will get some revisions to make them more thematic. They will have to discard one card to use Support cards. This reflects their lack of resources. It did not look historically accurate when I was constantly using the Medic card to make them more robust. The Support cards are: Communicate (lets you roll extra dice), Coordinate (lets you select an additional card), Fortify (lets the unit improve its survivability), Intel (+2 Initiative), Leadership (recover from Take Cover), Medic (heal one damaged unit), Operations (recycle one card), Out of Fuel (replace a destroyed tank unit with tank crewmen), Sabotage (removes one card from the game) and Smoke (improves survivability). This is the first session that used Elite Infantry. The Soviet Naval Infantry had that honor. They were linking up with the Partisans to deliver a mortar. The Elite Infantry get to roll one extra dice when attacking and do not take cover. They were effective and their Victory Points cost of 3 seems balanced,
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Oct 7, 2014 15:15:30 GMT -9
The terrain for Tank Shock:WWII has been upgraded. Tiles have tabs now. This makes them much easier to set up. Visualizing line of sight is easier and the hill tiles have some elevation now.
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Oct 11, 2014 11:20:30 GMT -9
Tank Shock: WWII will provide at least one scenario as a tribute to the bravery of the Polish forces who fought a doomed resistance against two totalitarian governments. The scenario will be the successful Polish Cavalry charge against Infantry that was caught in the open. This battle was the one that propagated the propaganda myth that the Polish Cavalry charged Panzers. The Cavalry did withdraw when armored cars showed and inflicted about 20 casualties. Adding this scenario will require commissioning art for the Polish Cavalry unit, but that is preferable to just using proxy units from the Red Army Cavalry. www.amazon.com/Poland-1939-Birth-Blitzkrieg-Campaign/dp/1841764086Poland 1939: The Birth Of Blitzkrieg (Campaign)
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Oct 16, 2014 7:39:57 GMT -9
The terrain tiles for Tank Shock: WWII are being upgraded to three tabs. Even the swamp tile has a tab, this represents swamp gases. The tabs make line of sight easier to understand and makes the tiles so much easier to handle. The minis are getting based on hexes now too. Facing is not a factor in this system but I like the look of the minis on the hexes versus just being billboards. I hope that these prototypes will be helpful when the project is ready for real artists to do their thing. The German minis are made by Lucas Neves.
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Oct 31, 2014 12:45:58 GMT -9
Prototype raised hex bases with unit labels by Pigmi Games. The unit stats and special abilities are underneath the base but could be on the sides. Wehrmacht Infantry models by Lucas Neves. Red Army models from Junior General.org The flat hex bases and terrain made by Arctic Dragon Games. Disclaimer: No living tissue from my fingers was damaged in the making of these models. [/ur
|
|
|
Post by cowboyleland on Oct 31, 2014 14:29:57 GMT -9
Those bases are cool.
|
|
|
Post by wyvern on Nov 1, 2014 5:52:15 GMT -9
The units on raised hex bases are very interesting, albeit obviously much more work to put together than the earlier standee unit markers. This is largely how I base my wargaming paper miniatures, but on flat bases of thick card, and using standard printed basing textures (like the free One Monk kind), cut to the appropriate size and shape for the game/rules system involved, with slots cut to pass the figure base tabs through, glued down flat on top of the thick card.
These will certainly improve the visual impact of the tabletop "in action" for Tank Shock. The unit stats should definitely be on the sides of the hexes though, not underneath the bases.
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Nov 20, 2014 14:06:45 GMT -9
Do any of you have comparison costs for boards/mats that are made of rubber or a flexible plastic? Initially I designed my game for Print-n-Play or Print on Demand, but now I am exploring other options. The prototype playing surface shown is 30" x 33", this was done to allow for the printing of 12 8 1/2" x 11" pieces of paper. The only printing on the mat will be hexes, the terrain is modular for my game.
|
|
|
Post by Sirrob01 on Nov 21, 2014 2:45:16 GMT -9
I had some success printing onto vinyl banner material 60cm (24inch) x 90cm (36inch) was about $12 when the print shop was having a sale about the only complaint I had was the file limit was set to low so i was restricted to a pretty low res image.
I think artscow offers something similar, canvas would be really good but the cost would be through the roof.
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Nov 21, 2014 14:00:16 GMT -9
I had some success printing onto vinyl banner material 60cm (24inch) x 90cm (36inch) was about $12 when the print shop was having a sale about the only complaint I had was the file limit was set to low so i was restricted to a pretty low res image. I think artscow offers something similar, canvas would be really good but the cost would be through the roof. Hmmm, I had not thought of using colored cloth with hexes printed on it. I need to investigate that. Cloth has a much better shelf life, easy to transport, store and probably weighs less than a map board/mat made of gray paper.
|
|
|
Post by Sirrob01 on Nov 21, 2014 16:20:17 GMT -9
I took a quick picture of my test vinyl mat I had done, those are battlemechs on the "board". bear in mind this one was a test for me so i used a pretty boring repeating tile pattern and didn't add a grid I'm working on something more full featured for the next sale (they happen monthly). I like that I can keep this rolled up and it's immune to all liquids/food . I'm going to sacrfice this one further to see if I can a fix mag sheet to the back and still retain reasonable roll ability.
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Dec 2, 2014 14:05:30 GMT -9
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Apr 23, 2015 20:04:21 GMT -9
Play tested another session today. This scenario is being developed as a tribute to the brave Polish Cavalry who successfully charged German Infantry in September, 1939. Their success was turned into a propaganda myth, used by both sides, that the Polish Cavalry charged tanks. Here is the battle report: www.facebook.com/pages/Arctic-Dragon-Games/278547612306875German Infantry models made by LVMenes (a member of CWF!) and Cavalry from juniorgeneral.org
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on May 7, 2015 17:15:40 GMT -9
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on May 24, 2015 17:01:48 GMT -9
I realize that this forum is for paper models but I am so excited that I want to share good news: Tank Shock:WWII is now online on VASSAL! Much thanks to Janko Kosel for establishing the interface. It is listed here www.vassalengine.org/status.php?when=day
|
|
|
Post by squirmydad on May 24, 2015 17:23:52 GMT -9
That's awesome news!
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Jun 3, 2015 19:15:45 GMT -9
Just in case insight into the play testing is of interest, this is what I use for play test reports:
Play test #35. Partisan Raid Opponent: Janko Kosel, Wehrmacht Me: Red Army First time online! Partisans raid a 3 armored cars and infantry posted in a village and at roadblock/checkpoints along the road.
Units: Sustain: Basic Infantry Platoons are a good baseline unit for all the other types of Infantry. Partisan special abilities and values are getting very close to final approval, strongly reflecting lightly sustained hit-and-run guerilla fighters. Sniper values and special abilities are good. Review: Mortars might need to have VP increased due to the value of indirect fire and their long range. Armored Cars need more play testing, might need higher value for Maneuver.
Janko: Armored Cars may move a bit further and can move 2 adjacent infantry units with it.
Me: Yes, this would make using them like the Tank Riders card! Should only be able to move an Infantry unit with the same or less strength.
Action Cards: Review: Maneuver is now a React card. Will have to do lots of play testing to identify situations where this usage will be complicated.
Mechanics, etc.: Sustain: Camouflage is a good feature. Review: Need to clarify if wire and sandbags remain in play when vehicles run through them.
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Jun 5, 2015 11:59:34 GMT -9
and here is another play test report:
Play test #36. Dnieper River Bridge Opponent: Janko Kosel, Wehrmacht Me: Red Army
Second time online!
German armor/infantry/artillery must cross the bridge on the Dnieper River.
Units: Sustain: Basic Infantry Platoons are a good baseline unit for all the other types of Infantry. Partisan special abilities and values are getting very close to final approval, strongly reflecting lightly sustained hit-and-run guerilla fighters. Sniper values and special abilities are good. Review: Mortars might need to have VP increased due to the value of indirect fire and their long range. Artillery have many procedures that require continuous tracking, too fiddly. Might become an off board asset, as is done with Air Strike. Engineers need special ability when assaulting bunkers, perhaps +1D6? Janko: What happens when you cross the wire with a tank or infantry? What happens when you cross sandbags? Me: Wire should be removed once crossed. Sandbags should stay.
Action Cards: Review: Maneuver is now a React card. Will have to do lots of play testing to identify situations where this usage will be complicated. Janko Idea: Action card: Flame thrower: engineers get +4D when attacking an adjacent bunker unit? Me: Yes, Engineers need to have bunker busting added to their special abilities. Perhaps +1 to hit when adjacent to a bunker. More cost effective to add to their special abilities than to commission a new card.
Mechanics, etc.: Sustain: Camouflage is a good feature. Review: Need to clarify if wire and sandbags remain in play if vehicles run through them.
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Jun 11, 2015 14:39:17 GMT -9
Play Test #38. Wehrmacht Cavalry Raid the Partisans & ElitesOpponent: Steven C Martusheff, Wehrmacht. Steven was instrumental in early revisions, play testing battles 38 through #17, including two blind play sessions. He also helped play test Quick Joust by Joseph Propati. Me: Red Army Medium: Tabletop, paper models Scenario: Twenty Victory Points with four Wehrmacht Cavalry raid Partisan village. Three Basic Infantry and 1 Sniper are the blocking force. They are camouflaged. Bad intel again!! Sixteen Victory Points with two Elite Soviet Naval Infantry delivering ammo and medicine to the five Partisan units at the village. Units:Steven: All the units seemed to be pretty well balanced..Me: All the units in this scenario seem to have balanced values and Victory Points. Their special abilities are thematic and properly balanced. Sustain: Partisan special abilities and values strongly reflect lightly sustained hit-and-run guerilla fighters. Sniper Won the game with Return Fire and Sharpshooter 6’s. Action Cards:Steven: Maneuver can move two units instead of one now. This is a good change.Sabotage and Air Strike should not require a discard since they are removed from the game. Mechanics, Terrain, etc.:Steven: increase of maximum hand size will be useful and all units seem balanced… Me: Communicate seems ideal for the Elites but it was removed from the game by Sabotage. Sustain: Camouflage is a good feature. Maneuver is now a React card. Will have to do lots of play testing to identify situations where this usage will be complicated. Sabotage revision: now it removes two cards in opponents hand from the game. Review: Return Fire and Sharpshooter 6 were game breakers!!! They continue to validate their value as a “come from behind” mechanism. When the Elites fired 4 D6 at the Sniper in the village the Sniper's Return Fire rolled 3 successive 6’s and won the game.
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Jun 14, 2015 18:06:58 GMT -9
Play Test #39. Mannerheim LineOpponent: Steven C Martusheff. Finland (Suomi). 39 units for 99 VP. Steven was instrumental in early revisions, play testing battles #8 through #17 and #38. This included two blind play sessions. He also helped play test Quick Joust by Joseph Propati. Me: Red Army. 30 units for 122 VP. Medium: Tabletop, paper models. Objective: This scenario was chosen to commemorate Finland’s brave defense against the USSR in the Winter War of 1939-1940. The Red Army launched a combined arms assault with tanks, infantry, artillery, air strikes and armored cars on the fixed positions of the Finnish army along the Mannerheim Line. The winner was the first to 50 Victory Points. Finland won by using a flexible defense. The right side of their line was chosen for breaching by the Red Army. They fell back and reoccupied their positions several times then made a successful counterattack. Units:The Armored Cars new ability to transport Infantry is a good fit. Their movement rate of six hexes might need to go back to five. Artillery continues to look like it should be an off table asset, as is done for Air Strike. The Anti-Tank Infantry range of four hexes might need to go to three, their Slow Acquisition looks like a good fit. The tanks might need to have better protection from Infantry. Getting hit by them on a 5 or 6 seems somewhat unrealistic. Mortars might need to be increased to Strength 2 and have an additional VP added for Friendly Fire. Sustain: Basic Infantry, Snipers, Elites. Action Cards:Charge! might be increased to allowing two units to Fire with it, as most other cards allow for two units now. Sabotage causes two cards to be removed from the game now. This seems like a good thematic fit and the cost is right. Mechanics, Terrain, etc.:Sustain: The Friendly Fire feature looked right. If two Fire cards were played by the Attacking player should the Defending player have the option to play another React card during that turn? All cards are React cards now. Will have to do lots of play testing to identify situations where this usage will be complicated. Paper model images by Lucas Neves and juniorgeneral.org.
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Jun 21, 2015 8:39:39 GMT -9
Tank Shock: WWII Rules v.24 Release
Rules v.24 incorporates many of the suggestions that have been developed in the recent play testing. Excess verbiage has been eliminated and the terminology has more consistency and clarity. Sequence of actions for using the React mechanism has also been clarified. Action Cards have been revised. All Action Cards can be used as React cards now. This game mechanic moves the play further away from the traditional turn based “I go, you go” war game system and closer to simultaneous play. “I like this, it is like it is always my turn!”...Janko Kosel. “Sniper” is the new Action Card. It makes the Snipers more thematic by allowing them to fire again without losing their camouflage and prevents Return Fire. This is the second card that is dedicated to a specific unit. “Tank Shock” was the first dedicated card and it was successful in making the tanks more thematic. This type of specialization opens up more opportunities for dedicating special cards to many other units. The revisions to the other Action Cards provide increased lethality or survivability. For example “Communicate” allows all misses to be rerolled and “Sabotage” causes two cards to be removed from the game. These changes enhance the risk/reward decision making process and the need for timely usage. Some units have been revised. Armored Cars are two distinct types now; Troop Transports and Scout Cars. Engineer units have bunker busting added to their abilities. Tanks have increased survivability versus Infantry. Unit sizes were increased for Anti-Tank Infantry. “Shrapnel” is the revised term for “Friendly Fire.” “Shrapnel” is more inclusive and applies to adjacent enemy units. As is often noted, there is nothing “Friendly” about indirect fire that lands too close.
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Jul 3, 2015 13:50:02 GMT -9
Play Test #41. Mannerheim LineOpponent: Victor! Jesse Classen. Red Army. 31 units for 124 VP. Me:. Finland (Suomi). 40 units for 102 VP. Medium: Tabletop, paper models. Objective: This scenario was chosen to commemorate Finland’s brave defense against the USSR in the Winter War of 1939-1940. The Red Army launched a combined arms assault with tanks, infantry, artillery, air strikes and armored cars on the fixed positions of the Finnish army along the Mannerheim Line. The winner was the first to 60 Victory Points. The Red Army won by using the long range firepower of the artillery and tanks to eliminate the Anti-tank Infantry and Mortars. They breached the right side of Finland’s line in spite of constant reinforcements. Units: Jesse: Still hard to resist using the mobility of the tanks and getting too far in front where they become “fire magnets” and don’t’ have Infantry to support them. Me: The Armored Cars new ability to transport Infantry is a good fit. Their movement rate of six hexes was reduced back to five. Artillery continues to look like it should be an off table asset, as is done for Air Strike. The Anti-Tank Infantry range of four hexes was tried at three which seemed to be a good fit, their Slow Acquisition looks like a good fit. Tanks have better protection from Infantry now as they are only hit on a 6. Tanks successfully lead assaults across open terrain. Mortars were increased to Strength 2 and have an additional VP added for Friendly Fire. Both of us forgot to use firing range of three hexes for the Basic Infantry and Elites, as we have been playing lots of scenarios with Range 2 units such as Partisans, Cavalry and Scouts. The Engineers did not play a significant role, need to do some Engineer centric scenarios to properly evaluate them. Sustain: Basic Infantry, Snipers, Elites. Action Cards: Jesse: Being able to use Maneuver to move a minimum of two units sped up the game. Me: Sabotage causes two cards to be removed from the game now. This seems like a good thematic fit and the cost is right. The timing of playing this card has become much more important now. Mechanics, Terrain, etc.:Sustain: The Friendly Fire feature looked right. Review: All cards are React cards now. Will have to do lots more play testing to identify situations where this usage will be complicated.
|
|
|
Post by arcticdragongames on Jul 18, 2015 3:00:32 GMT -9
|
|
|
Post by berneart76 on Jul 18, 2015 8:04:43 GMT -9
I like them both, but am a bit more inclined to go with the Aaron Hopkins design. I know I find the one he kindly made for me as "Tinkering Tom" to be extremely versatile.
|
|