On the old forums someone posted a homebrewed game system where you had a deck of cards, lovingly illustrated with gritty sci-fi images made by the poster's friend, wherein you drew 5 cards which dictated the mission - the active player had the option to discard one of the cards and draw a new one. Missions could be accomplished both in active and reactive turn and had a wide variety of tasks from performing a surprise attack to winning a face to face in reactive turn, requiring the presence of a single HVT, a single VIP, a single tech coffin and a single antenna (if memory serves). I have not been able to find it through searching. Does anyone have a link saved, know who posted it, or have the pdf/jpg of the cards saved?
No, it's not 20x20, it was a more dynamic system and the rules for it literally fit on one of the cards, using a standard 12" deployment zone with the same number of objective targets each game (but placed by the players alternating between them for each item, so never the same board set up). I mean, there's the whole meta-game with replacing objectives each player turn where you could try and get more opportunities to score objectives or deny scoring opportunities for your opponent. Got enemy Shinobu close to your dudes? Remove the assassinate objective. Drew a interrogate HVT card instead? Better race to the HVT that both have been ignoring thus far. You're winning that race but didn't make it this turn? Your opponent just discarded that objective and picked up the loot supply box objective that you've got an engineer close to, pure win, unless your opponent can beat you to it in their active turn.
This sounds more like YAMS than 20x20, but neither had any advanced graphics. Maybe it's somewhere on the DataSphere forums? http://www.data-sphere.net/forum/viewforum.php?f=28
Sounds like YAMS or TACOS to me. TACOS is what we play in my area: https://forum.corvusbelli.com/threads/alternate-play-system-tacos-mk-ii.578/
No problemo! Just noticing a small error in the OP of that thread: Should say "[...] places the first marker, which can't be on a building or in a deployment zone and has a exclusion zone of 8" - which also excludes other objective markers."
Thanks for posting that, @Xeurian - I probably would have missed this completely. You're a gentleman and a scholar.
Would love to see this get more traction, maybe a minor revision to clean up any rules issues or typos or anything that might be lingering - and then make a bit of a spash. My local area is always up for fun systems like this.
