Looking for a mass combat system...

[MerricB]

I'm not sure what you're refering to by formations, but Cry Havoc allows for groups of units to ge gathered into formations during combat, allowing a commander to issue a single command to the entire group of units, instead of needing to issue commands to each one.

True, true. When I discuss formations, I am referring to a more structured one than Cry Havoc describes - one with actual game effects.

Consider the Roman Phalanx as a good example of such - the forces are gathered together for offense and defense, but they lose manuevability when doing so. In particular, facing becomes important in formations. (Cavalry really need it as well). Interestingly, the D&D Miniatures mass combat system does deal with formations in either tight or loose forms; the former has a front and a back; the latter doesn't and is more manueverable, but at the penalty of not being so efficient when attacking.

I agree with Psion that the abstract army battle resolution system is quite good - unfortunately it's only about 15% of Cry Havoc whilst the unit combat system is about 80%!

Cheers!

 

[johnsemlak]

Are the mass combat systems in various AEG books mentioned (Empires, War, Mercenaries) different from each other?

 

[Psion]

Are the mass combat systems in various AEG books mentioned (Empires, War, Mercenaries) different from each other?

Yes.

 

[nothing to see here]

How about Fields of Blood?

I'm surprised more people haven't mentioned Fields of Blood's system. It plays exceptionally well.

There are only two things about the system I don't like. It (generally) glosses over the number of creatures per unit as an unimportant detail, and therefore gives no guidelines for games or plots that require unit sizes smaller than those arbitrarily assigned.

That and FoB battles require a fair amount of set - up.

Outside of those two minor quibbles -- I find it puts the competition to shame -- a slikc, playable yet detailed system that covers an immense range of possiblities.

 

[MerricB]

It's possible not enough people have Fields of Blood yet. I don't have it, though it's next on my list of "mass combat systems to get", after the disappointments of the MHb and Cry Havoc on that front.

Of course, first I have to stop buying so many D&D Miniatures that I have almost no money left over for actual game books.

Cheers!

 

[Cor Azer]

I double-checked: yes, you activate every unit you control on your turn.

Huh... Well then, I guess I discovered I have another House Rule in my game

Were you running an indoors battle? I think of these things as outdoors for the most part.

Cheers!

Nope, always outdoor battles. However, I usually had a lot of terrain present - cliffs, pits, hills, natural land ramps, city walls, other fortifications.

In fact, the main battle using this system was important to secure such a location before the enemy could and use all the terrain against the good guys (as it was, the terrain hindered both sides equally).

 

[Cor Azer]

True, true. When I discuss formations, I am referring to a more structured one than Cry Havoc describes - one with actual game effects.

Consider the Roman Phalanx as a good example of such - the forces are gathered together for offense and defense, but they lose manuevability when doing so. In particular, facing becomes important in formations. (Cavalry really need it as well). Interestingly, the D&D Miniatures mass combat system does deal with formations in either tight or loose forms; the former has a front and a back; the latter doesn't and is more manueverable, but at the penalty of not being so efficient when attacking.

I agree with Psion that the abstract army battle resolution system is quite good - unfortunately it's only about 15% of Cry Havoc whilst the unit combat system is about 80%!

Cheers!

I see. I tend to dislike things such as facings when I'm doing combat and the like, if only because I enjoy flipping a coin in my head to decide whether or not to use a battlemap for a particular combat or no (We have a battlemap and miniatures, but I don't always use them, particularly if I want a more cinematic feel to a given battle). Adding facing to such a system makes it harder to abstract (not impossible, but harder), and so removes a bit of my choice.

 

[Agback]

The best mass combat system I've ever come across was in FGUs Bushido.

Ouch!

Bushido's mass combat system is one of those sets that has rules for everything, but none of them work. It turns out that even the greatest advantage of situation and generalship cannot overcome odds of four to one. And it turns out that fighting cautiously is not safer than fighting heroically.

We had similar problems with the status system in Bushido. It sounds great, but the rules contradict one another.

Regards,


Agback

 

[S'mon]

The Conan mass combat system is available free at Mongoose. See: http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/pdf/conanmasscombat.pdf

EDIT - Posting OGL content without the proper OGL form (license with section 15, etc.) is against forum rules; feel free to post the link to the proper thing as above, though. -Henry