I have been wrecking my brain to find a good solution for representing razor wire in Infinity. The problem is that the rules would allow the troopers to easily vault over what would be a realistic amount of razor wire. Hazardous environment rules also don't really solve the issue, because the troopers would not stay on the razor wire when they do a roll. Maybe simply declaring it very difficult terrain? It is possible to jump over razor wire or climb over it, I have done that in real life. Can someone point me to house rules for razor wire? there must be some because razor wire is a common feature on battlefields.
Difficult terrain pretty much covers razor wire and similar stuff. It's not meant to cause injury, it's meant to deter you with the threat of injury, and/or slow down an approach by making you waste time cutting through it.
Terrain seems an aspect of the rules that, maybe because it's that little more difficult to design in, is also the most readily omitted. It always niggles me that troops have Skills I pay for in my list, yet never play. So I like the idea that razor wire (or whatever 23rd Century battlefield hazard might be similar in function) could be added into games to easily add Terrain factors into scenarios. This seems a useful addition.
just making it Difficult terrain seems like a good idea. To flesh this out, how about this: Razorwire is very difficult terrain for everyone, including those with the Multiterrain skill. Engineers can spend a short skill and remove a part the size of a wide access marker. Such a house rule would make razor wire quite an obstacle. If you want it even more complex, it could be possible to destroy razor-wire with anti-materiel weapons. Not sure how realistic that is, especially when it comes to tactical bows.
Inspired by the suggestion, we played a mission without existing razor wire on the tabletop, but with provisional rules to allow laying it. 'Lay Razor Wire' is a Short Skill that can be arbitrarily declared after a MOV Short Skill; just like other Short Skills. Example sequence: Player declares Short Skill: MOV (10cm/4"); then obtain ARO.s; then declares Short Skill: Lay Razor Wire The wire is laid across the path the trooper moved. We used Micro Art Studios barricades to represent the wire, since we had them handy, and they're a suitable length. The pictures show 1) the trooper starting the MOV 2) the silhouette marking the extent of the MOV 3) the barricade in position to represent wire after ARO's and declaring 2nd Short Skill: Lay Razor Wire We played 20x20 (of course! ) choosing Hostage Siege as a suitable main mission, and rolling Kill the Lieutenant as a secondary. It worked well enough in the game, allowing the hostage taker (defender) to spend a couple of Orders walking some wire out and narrowing some of the access ways, which made the attacking player work around the obstructions - the attacker didn't try to work through the wire in this game. Making 'Lay Razor Wire' as a Short Skill was based on an idea that the trooper might be capable of rolling a drum of wire out, but if it caught an ARO midway through the attempt, could choose to Dodge etc. but then have failed to run the wire out of course. (I've no idea how 'Play by Intent' players would make that work, presumably by making their opponent lay the wire in a position that's to their own disadvantage. </troll> ) It worked fine with 10-10 (4"-4"), but not sure how it'd work with different movement ranges; perhaps define what a standard length of wire is. Fluff-wise, the skill should probably be limited to Engineers, and the razor wire itself presumably Disposable (n). We used two lengths, but think you'd want 4 to make it truly worthwhile; so Disposable (4) - maybe the wonders of future miniaturization; or pull stunts with Baggage Remotes. Back to you @prophet of doom
I am amazed that someone still plays Hostage Siege, a mission I have discarded so long ago! How did it play out? I have the idea of a "commando edition" in the drawer where all games have attackers and defenders, maybe I will dig that up one day. It includes the Hostage mission. I like the idea of laying out razor wire like this. I agree it should be disposable (3). The idea is cool that the troopers has to walk the line of the wire, but that would be bloody dangerous! I don't see the problem with playing by intent. When it comes to models who have that skill, that should probably either be engineers or a scenario with defenders where all defenders have the skill. You still would likely not run out of razor wire models because the defensive player would not spend too much orders on that activity.
your asymetrical missions were always the most interesting in my opinion, your hostage siege was sick
oh really? You liked them? I also think that asymetrical missions are more interesting because they resemble real battle situations a bit better. I like to get immersed into some form of narrative when I am playing a tabletop game. The reasons I chucked them out of 20x20 was that I realised that I could not playtest them to satisfaction and that they did not meet the criteria for casual games that I had envisioned for 20x20. Asymetrical is obviously a lot harder to balance. Thus I had the idea of a commando edition which is designed for more experimental gaming. It would be quite a bit of work to finish that, but I like designing missions. Maybe it will happen one day. the problem is that I don't have the players available for experimental gaming and playtesting.
yes they always scratched that itch for me more than the ITS falvour variant. We did have this convo when you first took them out and I've been waiting for the commando edition for a while now. ;)
I knew you were revising the system, but I guess my PDF must be an older version still. Can we have prominent version numbers in future, please? The hostage idea was immediately compelling and it was interesting and fun. The distances seems to great and the points feel too complex, but it's definitely a very strong scenario that deserves inclusion. But dangerous? There's a reason they're Cubed! Yes, Disposable (3) is probably about right. Maybe it's monofilament wire on some kind of compact ceramic spool (qv. that Arthur C Clarke book with orbital elevators) Laying Wire also gave the defender something to do while attacker approached. There are plenty of possible tweaks - it's an evocative situation. We could play test it if you're interested - maybe deserves it's own topic?
Yes, we like your 20x20 system. In particular, we like the accessibility and that the points are usually simpler than ITS' dreaded clauses. Half the reason I can't make tactical decisions in ITS is because the scoring reads like "If the player has activated more beacons than their opponent but less than 3 in total, they win 4 points - unless at least 2 of the activated beacons are NOT in the enemy half or only within 20cm of their Deployment Zone, in which case 3 points. If both players have the SAME number of beacons but one player has more beacons in the enemy half, they win 2 points..."'etc. etc.
Razorwire as difficult terrain that doesn't block LoS or provide any cover is pretty suitable an interesting. Slows you down and is basically open ground for defensive troops. Thick razorwire you might call a Saturation Zone as well perhaps? That's actually even better for lone defensive snipers and such!
I agree. I have lost a couple of ITS games because I had not read the text carefully. The event that triggered me to write 20x20 was an ITS tournament where we learned about the missions played just before the games. One of the missions was Beaconland. Try getting that mission into your head in 2 minutes. I have seriously spent 20 minutes reading a page of a Paradiso mission trying to figure out what I have to do and which troopers to take with me. You will like the upcoming version of 20x20 in this regard. I just simplified the victory conditions of a few missions. I had realised that 20x20 had suffered a bit from complicated scoring.
hmmh, yes. Razor wire is somehow appearing a pretty fascinating topic. Maybe I can do more with that stuff. I hate razor wire in real life.
A DT zone that had no cover would be an interesting way to play it. Its unrealistic that the wire does more than slow a troop down and an infinitely high zone that most troops in the game are required to stop at when they come into contact with it should be sufficient to be a fairly major obstacle in the game. As to the idea of introducing damage effects to such a rule, I wouldn't. CB has gone out of their way to remove swarm grenades and Monofilament zones from the game, because they understand that such zones not only tend to slow the game down but overly penalize moving around the table. It also seems somewhat out of place for things like TAGs to be taking damage from mere wire.
Interestingly, that would be the case by default unless you were to assign an existing type to razorwire terrain, or to make it into its own category eligible to be chosen by Multiterrain users.
true, but sometimes I feel it is necessary to stress some rules in this complicated game. Just checked the rules again, Very difficult terrain seems to be the better option, otherwise troopers with 4-4 would not be affected that much. I assume that a razor wire mesh would be about 1 inch high and 1 inch wide. As for laying wire, why not make that an entire order skill to move the distance travelled? Maybe even somehow make it possible to use both movements to get more use out of an order spent. Since there is an interest in asymetrical missions, I thought that I could start a new project of doing a couple of missions for the Paradiso battleground, followed by some missions set on spaceships. The razor wire could definitely find some good use on Paradiso.
So even at just DT all troops without the terrain typr stop when they come into B2B with the terrain. Personally i think forcing people to stop and then spen another order to move through terrain that doesnt even provide cover of visual/burst mods is prpbably ebough to give character and not severly start affecting game balance and design. I do like the idea of alternate missikns though
