Forum

• Suggstion for initiative: The combat round is a few seconds the characters can change their mind about what they want to do based on actions that have taken place before their turn. My suggestion would be for each to declare their actions and THEN draw initiative cards. That way, the players and NPCs are committed to their actions. I believe this helps to better simulate things happening simultaneously.

As players can swap their initiative cards it allows better coordination, so if the plan is Player 1 kicks open the door and Player 2 throws in a grenade but the initiative cards mean Player 2 goes first then you just swap. The only time you have simultaneous actions is when a NPC and a player have the same initiative (if I am reading the rules correctly).

Given 10-15 second rounds it would be possible to change actions in response to what is happening during the round.

Regarding ovewatch, the player's handbooks says "Just like cover, overwatch must be directed at a specific field of fire, covering three sides of your hex as per the diagram on page xx. To indicate this, place an OVERWATCH marker underneath your token." I cannot find the diagram that Overwatch mentions, nor the diagarm for Cover.[/list]

I read this as overwatch covering a 180 degree arc. I think this is too broad & the readiness to fire at any instant should only cover a 60 degree arc.

A tank's smoke dischargers (not to be confused with the aforementioned diesel smoke generators) are always loaded with WP grenades.

In the game world, probably not, because of supply limitations.

The smoke screen should cover an arc of about 5 hexes, at a range of 3 hexes from the vehicle itself, I think.

In the game world, probably not, because of supply limitations.

Okay, rephrasing — "a tank's smoke dischargers, if and when loaded, will always be loaded with WP grenades".

The smoke screen should cover an arc of about 5 hexes, at a range of 3 hexes from the vehicle itself, I think.

Sounds about right.

Should also be noted that more modern 90's vehicle smoke dischargers do also block IR.
The current rules explicitly state that "thermal optics can see through smoke", but this is not always true.

Given 10-15 second rounds it would be possible to change actions in response to what is happening during the round.

Sure, if "change my mind" is treated as a fast action.

Everything is happening within that 5 - 10 seconds, and everyone's actions fill up the available time. Really, everyone is acting simultaneously, in a noisy and confusing situation. Initiative is a game contrivance that resolves the conflict over who shot first when two characters act against each other, and also keeps everyone from speaking at the same time. Changing your mind based on another player's actions is at heart a form of metagaming, which (a) allows groups to be more effective than they really would be and (b) eliminates the comedy of errors that occurs when everyone tries to do conflicting things at the same time. I don't worry too much about (a) but the loss of (b) is disappointing. But what to do about it?

I get the intent of the suggestion re initiative cards but drawing new initiative every round and declaring your intentions at the start of the round slows things down. Also, it doesn't really solve the problem. When Bob says, "I'm shooting the guy with the RPG," I can still change my mind before I speak, so we haven't fixed anything. Having players write down what they plan to do gets rid of that but also slows everything down. I think most groups want to keep things fast-moving. I think also that most people aren't too concerned about this. To me the best solution is just to set a shared expectation for the group & then go have fun.

As an aside, when you get that coordinated action -- Bob kicks open the door for me to throw a grenade -- there should have been some kind of communication to coordinate this. A few shouted words is a free action but to communicate and agree on a plan should be treated as a slow action, eating up a round. It's a pet peeve of mine when people have conversations during a firefight and pretend they took no time at all.

Regarding ovewatch, the player's handbooks says "Just like cover, overwatch must be directed at a specific field of fire, covering three sides of your hex as per the diagram on page xx. To indicate this, place an OVERWATCH marker underneath your token." I cannot find the diagram that Overwatch mentions, nor the diagarm for Cover.[/list]

I read this as overwatch covering a 180 degree arc. I think this is too broad & the readiness to fire at any instant should only cover a 60 degree arc.

Interesting. Based on other hex-based games, I interpret it by default as this:

https://imgur.com/5kAjpWL

But agree it's too broad (for cover, sure, but definitely for overwatch) and think one of these two options is better. I definitely prefer B but it's a little more complex to track on the table.

https://imgur.com/1RHX71j

The use of the scale D to A mimics the grading system that is used in many countries.

Not in Australia ... we give number grades (often, but not always, out of 20 or %) which are often then expressed as a 1-5 Grade (at least in NSW until six years ago when I retired after teaching High School since 1977) as mandated by, IIRC, ACER or some other national body for 'consistency' across the several States and Territories.

Several school districts in the US are moving away from it as well.
And it's not a D-to-A scale, the traditional scale, and the one in the Alpha book, is [F, D, C, B, A]. (F is unskilled.)

That said, it's pretty much irrelevant since the ABCDF is a standard grading scale across many nations, and is used from intermediate grades through post-graduate degrees in those.

Still, it's one more entry that is, to be blunt, a potential point of failure to grasp/communicate. A minor one. Its benefits just about outweigh that potential for failure.

Just a few general thoughts on the rulebooks, they have probably been brought up already or in different places, but example situations are good, more parts could benefit from those. From the top of my head some encounter situations seemed vague, how long/far would the animals track the party and so on. Having managed a few free roam campaigns myself of course the final say is with the game master, but having a solid set of base rules would very much reduce the double-checking and abiguity of the rules.
Also while I'm more than certain the community would produce these in no time at all, will there be any "cheat sheets" for the GM screens/manual where all the main things are condensed on to a few pages? Seeing as this is quite a simulation heavy game, there are a lot of things to keep tack of and such "cheat sheets" will certainly come in handy.