Fubar new concepts.

The next generation of the FUBAR rules will be created here.
johnl5555
Posts: 19
Joined: September 12th, 2011, 12:35 pm

Fubar new concepts.

Postby johnl5555 » August 6th, 2012, 9:42 pm

Here is a repost of mine from the Yahoo group. Oops, that should be Fubar not Funar.

I would also add that Overwatch/On Guard should be
a dedicated option and NOT a result of failing to achieve anything else. Also,
low quality troops would only be allowed to react 1x while better troops could
roll against a -1 on quality for a 2nd reactive fire. On Guard lasts until that
unit either fires again in another turn or the unit is diced for activation.

I have never liked the idea of a player being able to overrun a defensive
position because the defender ONLY had x dice to roll for fire and the attacker
knew it. Perhaps heavy weapons should never check vs quality to see if they can
fire again? Perhaps only if they roll doubles then the weapon has malfunctioned
for the remainder of that turn?

Ok, ditch the suppression idea. Never liked it and always thought it slowed
down the game. I also believe it limits the game. New players stumble about
trying to decide whether to suppress or eliminate their troops when they should
be focusing on their tactics in the game.

Missile launchers in HE mode, mortars and artillery should use a template for
damage.

Vehicle damage. Vehicle damage results in nothing, KO'd or pinned results.
Pinned means the vehicle must fall back X distance and may not be activated next
turn.

Helo/VTOL actions. They can move anywhere on the table in a turn but may fire
only one weapon. Can make a tactical move of 18" and fire all weapons plus
unload or pickup passengers at a 6" penalty to movement. They may also move
forward, backwards or side to side in any combination during that move.
Example:VTOL moves forward 12" fires all weapons. Then it slides to its left
behind some buildings with its remaining 6" of movement. Ed and I have used this
in our games and it works exceptionally well. You can also introduce two modes
of flying. Nape of the Earth/ground hugging or at altitude. Ground hugging will
block the aircraft's LOS (and cannot be used for general movement) while at
Altitude will not. The latter also makes the aircraft visible to the enemy on
the tabletop. Example: The VTOL starts its turn by flying forward 12" at
altitude. It is fired at by a unit on Overwatch/On Guard but is missed. It then
fires all its weapons at an enemy position. It wants to take advantage of cover
and slides to its left taking cover behind buildings. Its LOS is now blocked
until it is flying at altitude again. Plus it may ONLY fly in its 18" mode until
it goes back to altitude. Did I explain that well enough? It's actually quite
simple to do in a game and adds a lot to it.

Thanks,

John

Tim G
Posts: 14
Joined: July 6th, 2012, 11:27 pm
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Contact:

Re: Fubar new concepts.

Postby Tim G » August 9th, 2012, 2:30 pm

I like the idea of having blast templates for certain heavy weapons. Adds a little chrome and can be used to separate the weapons used for area bombardment from armor-piercing / anti-tank weapons.

I actually like the suppression rule. And I feel a modern/sci-fi set needs them as pinning down your enemy with heavy fire seems like a pretty common tactic. I do see your point about players debating suppress vs. kill in the middle of what should be a fast and furious battle. What about this: The unsaved hits automatically count as suppressed results until the unit reaches its max suppression. After that, any unsaved hits count as kills.

I do this as a matter of course just to keep things simple, and, as you say, to keep the battle moving.

Tim G

johnl5555
Posts: 19
Joined: September 12th, 2011, 12:35 pm

Re: Fubar new concepts.

Postby johnl5555 » August 10th, 2012, 7:31 am

Actually, that's not a terrible idea. I am also a fan of pinning units since it is a viable tactic. I just wonder if a unit should be able to take X suppressions period rather than a variable total?

Thanks,

John

User avatar
Craig
Posts: 283
Joined: September 5th, 2011, 1:03 pm
Location: Wales, UK
Contact:

Re: Fubar new concepts.

Postby Craig » August 10th, 2012, 8:22 pm

I am giving this a few mkore days then I'm going to drag together all the ideas here and on the yahoo group and see what we've come up with.

I'm on holiday for the last two weeks of the month so should be able to put some real time to this.
Cheers,
Craig.
"Youth and Talent are no match for Age and Treachery".

andyskinner
Posts: 8
Joined: September 12th, 2011, 2:31 pm

Re: Fubar new concepts.

Postby andyskinner » August 10th, 2012, 9:36 pm

I think the problem in having a unit take all suppressions and then casualties is that it introduces a weakness for more experienced troops. In some circumstances, getting more activations may be more important than how many figures you end up with. A large Green unit taking 4 hits could take 1 suppression and 3 casualties and go. Activation would be at 6. A similar Elite unit would take 4 suppressions and no casualties, and would also activate on 6. They now have the same chance of activating, but the Elite has suffered more.

Maybe I've misunderstood something, but that doesn't seem right.

It used to seem odd to me that casualties don't cause more suppression, or that you can't suppress less experienced troops as much as more experienced. What makes it clearer is that FUBAR treats suppression as a bonus rather than a penalty--it allows you to take a suppression instead of a kill, and allows more experienced troops to do more of this. It isn't that the troops are suppressed by the fire--they are suppressed because of their reaction to the fire, keeping themselves alive but down.

I feel that having units take all suppressions and then casualties would turn this bonus for elite units into a penalty in some cases.

andy

User avatar
ianrs54
Posts: 99
Joined: September 12th, 2011, 8:30 am

Re: Fubar new concepts.

Postby ianrs54 » August 11th, 2012, 9:21 am

The problem here is using a D6.....dosen't give a large range. Don't want to change this, could you perhapes use a % surpressed modifier which would be grade modified ?
IanS - author, moderator TOE group

User avatar
Sergeant Crunch
Posts: 33
Joined: May 12th, 2012, 5:46 pm
Location: San Angelo, TX
Contact:

Re: Fubar new concepts.

Postby Sergeant Crunch » August 11th, 2012, 2:22 pm

I've never really had a problem with the suppression rules, kinda like them actually. Just felt that they'd be a little more understandable if they had more space for a better explanation. Suppression is an important concept in small unit tactics. Most modern tactics involve a fire team or squad suppressing the target while another fire team or squad assaults it. The way suppression and activation work in FUBAR is probably the closest I've seen a game come to modeling that correctly. I would highly support a "suppressive fire" action that resulted in all unsaved hits being suppression counters rather than hits.

I agree with the need for a system to handle Area of Effect weapons. A number of sci-fi lines include models with things like mortars, rocket launchers and artillery (though my belief is that artillery is best represented by off board assets at scales above 6mm). These really need something to reflect that they effect more than the point of impact. My solution resolving an indirect attack in FUBAR is as follows:

Units with indirect fire weapons do not need LOS to the target
in order to fire at it.
Units with the RTO or Leader attributes may call in indirect fire
or off board strikes as spotters. Spotters must have LOS to the
target point.
To resolve indirect fire or off-board strikes declare the target
point then roll 1d6 and a scatter die. If the scatter die does not
indicate a direct hit the target point shifts 1d6-(suppression
value of unit).


A couple points of clarification are in order though. I have a short list of unit abilities (RTO or radio-operator being one of them) that models can be assigned. The scatter die referenced is the GW scatter die, though other methods can be applied. Scatter distance is the result of 1d6 minus the maximum number of suppression counters the firing or spotting unit have. (Could never figure out how to write that in a short enough manner to fully explain what I was thinking.)

Appropriate weapons are assigned an AoE# ability. The # indicates the radius from the point of impact. After the impact point is determined, any model within the AoE radius from that point is attacked with the full FP of the firing weapon.
This space intentionally left blank.

Tim G
Posts: 14
Joined: July 6th, 2012, 11:27 pm
Location: Detroit, Michigan
Contact:

Re: Fubar new concepts.

Postby Tim G » August 11th, 2012, 8:46 pm

Andy - I hadn't thought about this before. It (automatic suppressed, then kills) does seems like a disadvantage in the situation you describe. I guess I would imagine that better trained troops would adopt an attitude/training that "you win wars by killing your enemy, not getting killed." That is, if it takes them longer to reach an objective due to suppression, that's ok because the unit would be in good shape to take and hold it. A shot-up green unit on the other hand would most likely get bounced out/overrun pretty quickly.

This is where FUBAR needs some detailed examples I think. So, just for fun here goes...

"Example 1: A green unit of eight Guardsmen takes four unsaved hits. Its player takes 1 hit as a suppressed result and three hits as kills. During its next activation it must roll a six to activate: 5+ for green, -1 for the one suppressed Guardsman. It fails its activation roll. The suppressed figure stands up and the unit fires with its five remaining members (five dice rolling for 6+).

Example 2: An elite unit of eight Marines takes four unsaved hits. Its player takes all four hits as suppressed. During its next activation it must roll a six to activate: 2+ for elite, -4 for the four suppressed Marines. It fails its activation roll. The suppressed Marines stand up and the unit fires with its eight members (eight dice rolling for 4+).

Example 3: The next turn, the Guardsmen unit with five remaining figures takes 2 unsaved hits. Its player decides to count these hits as kills. On its next activation, the unit fails, rolling a 4. As the unit is below 50% it must withdraw.

Example 4: The next turn, the Marines, still at full strength, take 2 unsaved hits. The player decides to take both as suppressed. Its player rolls a 3 and fails to activate (elite 2+, suppressed -2). The suppressed figures stand up and the eight marines make one move toward their objective."

Craig did I gets the rules right? I'm just a Green 5+ FUBAR player ;)

Of course, every battle is different, but in these obviously made up examples, elites do well by the suppression rule. But as I've said elsewhere, both having a choice, or making suppression mandatory works for me :)

Tim G.


andyskinner wrote:I think the problem in having a unit take all suppressions and then casualties is that it introduces a weakness for more experienced troops. In some circumstances, getting more activations may be more important than how many figures you end up with. A large Green unit taking 4 hits could take 1 suppression and 3 casualties and go. Activation would be at 6. A similar Elite unit would take 4 suppressions and no casualties, and would also activate on 6. They now have the same chance of activating, but the Elite has suffered more.

Maybe I've misunderstood something, but that doesn't seem right.

It used to seem odd to me that casualties don't cause more suppression, or that you can't suppress less experienced troops as much as more experienced. What makes it clearer is that FUBAR treats suppression as a bonus rather than a penalty--it allows you to take a suppression instead of a kill, and allows more experienced troops to do more of this. It isn't that the troops are suppressed by the fire--they are suppressed because of their reaction to the fire, keeping themselves alive but down.

I feel that having units take all suppressions and then casualties would turn this bonus for elite units into a penalty in some cases.

andy

tjans
Posts: 11
Joined: December 10th, 2012, 3:38 am

Re: Fubar new concepts.

Postby tjans » December 14th, 2012, 11:34 pm

Tim G., I don't understand these scenarios...

"It fails its activation roll. The suppressed Marines stand up and the unit fires with its eight members (eight dice rolling for 4+)."

If they fail activation, how can they stand up from suppression and fire? If they fail activation aren't they simply just on guard and can't fire unless an enemy walks in front of them?

mithril
Posts: 27
Joined: December 22nd, 2011, 9:59 pm

Re: Fubar new concepts.

Postby mithril » December 15th, 2012, 1:17 am

tjans wrote:Tim G., I don't understand these scenarios...

"It fails its activation roll. The suppressed Marines stand up and the unit fires with its eight members (eight dice rolling for 4+)."

If they fail activation, how can they stand up from suppression and fire? If they fail activation aren't they simply just on guard and can't fire unless an enemy walks in front of them?


even under current FUBAR rules, when a new turn begins your suppression's are cleared, even if you fail activation.

and i'm pretty sure what he is providing examples to are the proposed alterations where units that fail activation get 1 action, while units that succeed get 2 actions. this change has been proposed because under the current rules, where failure to activate means you can't move or shoot except as a reaction to enemy attack, a string of bad rolls can result in games where neither side moves much at all.


Return to “Ultra FUBAR”

Created by Matti from StylesFactory.pl and Warlords of Draenor
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
GZIP: Off
 

 

cron