quote:

---

Originally posted by Slapdragon

After looking at the AAM rules, it comes to my attention that they sort of suck. I am not faulting AH, they have to make the rules easy to get to for new audiences or else the things will never sell.

I am thinking about writing an alternate rules for the game and developing new cards for the minis. Anyone want to take a shot at it with me?

---

quote:

---

Thanks. I am more thinking of how to increase realism without increasing complexity. Almost any medium tank can have people riding on it - not just the T-34 for example.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Slapdragon
#2 Universal Unit Actions (each turn)

A- Infantry units may move, attack, assault, or stay stationary. Infantry may ride on any vehicle with cargo capacity, or any any tank with Infantry Carry ability.

B- Support units may move, attack with their support weapon, attack as infantry, or stay stationary. Support units may ride on any vehicle with cargo capacity. (in the case of guns, often this is a "towed" movement)

C- Vehicles (tanks) may move, attack, assault, or stay stationary.

D- Vehicles (support) may move, attack, or stay stationary.

E- Leadership units may move, attack, assault, support (leadership) or stay stationary. Leaders may ride on any vehicle with cargo capacity, or any any tank with Infantry Carry ability.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by XAos

quote:

---

Originally posted by Slapdragon
#2 Universal Unit Actions (each turn)

A- Infantry units may move, attack, assault, or stay stationary. Infantry may ride on any vehicle with cargo capacity, or any any tank with Infantry Carry ability.

B- Support units may move, attack with their support weapon, attack as infantry, or stay stationary. Support units may ride on any vehicle with cargo capacity. (in the case of guns, often this is a "towed" movement)

C- Vehicles (tanks) may move, attack, assault, or stay stationary.

D- Vehicles (support) may move, attack, or stay stationary.

E- Leadership units may move, attack, assault, support (leadership) or stay stationary. Leaders may ride on any vehicle with cargo capacity, or any any tank with Infantry Carry ability.

---

My guess is that considerable play-testing went into the A&Aminis turn sequence. When I look at the tactics I would play, the implications of that turn sequence looks very inticate. And it gets more intricate each time I read a new special ability/rule. e.g. Strike & Fade, since the movement is after firing. This can be used to shoot & then get out of the enemies LoS. But only if your the "1st-player" and being the first player is a liability for some other tactics. Or "transport", you can load and unload during the movement phase but not during the assault phase. So the 2 phases serve entirly different purposes in the game design/balence. Before I saw the full wording of the transport rules, I thought the movement phase was just an assault phase with attacks not allowed.
A&Aminis is obviosly using the 2 types of phase to create a "simultaneous" effect in the tactics (even though each seperate part of the turn is actually sequential). Any "realistic" change to that turn sequence, risks degenerting the game sequence back to "side-A moves, then side-B moves." which is entirly sequential (and hence not at all realistic.) So you should be very careful about redefining what actions can be done in a turn.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sean-Khan
That's where Halftrack might prove to be really excellent - you move, enemy moves, you shoot with carried infantry and move away with the halftrack before enemy has a chance to return fire.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Slapdragon
... what is the most basic thing that any unit can do in combat in the span of a relatively short (1 hour) period of combat.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by XAos

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sean-Khan
That's where Halftrack might prove to be really excellent - you move, enemy moves, you shoot with carried infantry and move away with the halftrack before enemy has a chance to return fire.

---

Nice idea, but you should re-read the wording on the halftrack
Fighting Platform: A Soldier carried by this unit can attack during your assault phase if this unit doesn't move during that phase.
So the halftrack is explicitly forbidden to move if the passenger fires. The special abilities seem to be full of little details like that. Hence my guess that A/H have done a lot of play testing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by XAos
I don't think the A/H rules are for an hour of combat, more like 5 minutes. I base that on the rule forbidding a 251/1 to tow a Pak:38. Something it did do historically. I conclude that the timescale in A&A minis is sufficiently short that limbering & unlimbering would use up most of the game length. And hence A/H considered it simpler to forbid it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vulturedoodle

My take on the rules as they are now is that this game is designed for an action like the scenes in "Kelly's Heroes," or an episode of the old, old television series "Combat." Or maybe a really small scenario of Squad Leader.

"We got these here squads and those two Shermans, and we wanna knock out that machine gun nest and take that little village there," rather than platoon/company level actions. Which is okay with me. There are a whole bunch of already existing rule sets for the latter. But it *is* fun to design a game, isn't it?

Regards,
Steve F.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vulturedoodle

My take on the rules as they are now is that this game is designed for an action like the scenes in "Kelly's Heroes," or an episode of the old, old television series "Combat." Or maybe a really small scenario of Squad Leader.

"We got these here squads and those two Shermans, and we wanna knock out that machine gun nest and take that little village there," rather than platoon/company level actions. Which is okay with me. There are a whole bunch of already existing rule sets for the latter. But it *is* fun to design a game, isn't it?

Regards,
Steve F.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Slapdragon

Expanding the time to an hour of combat is one of the issues (60 1 minute turns) I am trying to address.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Slapdragon
My question is: what objection do you have to a simple to play beer and pretzels mini game that is also historically faithful to the units involved? Does a mini game that is historically accurate somehow loose its pizazz? Do you have an objection to the creation of a system that is both historically accurate AND quick to play, rather than AAM, which has very much chosen to use cartoons of the historical units?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by XAos

quote:

---

Originally posted by Slapdragon

Expanding the time to an hour of combat is one of the issues (60 1 minute turns) I am trying to address.

---

I think that would create a timing problem, consider;
A&Aminis has simple "beer & pretzels" rules, is designed to play 7-10 game turns in an hour & with an artificial limit of only 15 units a side (about 2 platoons)
You want to design a rules set that is "more accurate". Plays 60 game turns. and I presume with company level forces (say 30 units a side.?). The resulting game could need a weekend to play. While spending an entire weekend on one game is not entirly a bad thing [)] It's also not something that most gamers can do on a regular basis.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vulturedoodle

quote:

---

Originally posted by Slapdragon
My question is: what objection do you have to a simple to play beer and pretzels mini game that is also historically faithful to the units involved? Does a mini game that is historically accurate somehow loose its pizazz? Do you have an objection to the creation of a system that is both historically accurate AND quick to play, rather than AAM, which has very much chosen to use cartoons of the historical units?

---

No objection. Apologies if my posts seem to imply that. I suppose it just seems a little premature to throw out the existing rules before the game is released. A good idea -- revising the rules -- might lose steam and die for lack of involvement because no one has the system experience necessary to make good improvements.

One thing I think the game could use is some means of highlighting the policy and performance differences between the various nationalities (and/or unit types, such as Rangers). This is the biggest failing, IMO, of Memoir '44. The only difference between the two sides is the shape and color of the units. They use the same cards, have the same strengths and disadvantages.

If I were going to change anything about AAM, that's probably the first place I'd look.

Regards,
Steve F.

---