New Minis Game I'm Developing -- Any Interest?

[typo]

I'm currently putting together a playable rule set for a game I've been working on in small bursts for a couple years now. I've decided I want to get a prototyped version "up and running" in the near future, and I figured I'd put out a call to you guys and see if anybody's interested playtesting and feedback over the course of the next semester or so.

I'm taking this project pretty seriously, and I intend to put together something that I can submit around the industry to get some eyes on it and will self-publish it in the very likely event that nobody else is interested.

The game itself will be very tactics-oriented, and should be fairly easy to pick up. It's a modern / near-future combat game in which each player controls a single squad of soldiers, so there's generally less than ten minis to each side. Despite the small number of models on the table, the system allows for a great amount of detail and variation in the game.

I don't believe it will play much like anything else on the market, and I have high hopes that the system will be accessible, unique, and genuinely fun and competitive to play. But the only way to find out is to get eyes on the rules and games on the table. I hope some gamers here will be interested in giving me a little hands-on time and feedback and help polish this game into a gem.

Any comments and feedback are appreciated. Feel free to email me at [e-mail] if you have any specific questions you want to send me directly.

[Leudast1215]

I wouldn't mind helping in the BETA testing and over-all scheme of this if I like it because more variety in gaming = good.

[Andrew]

Actually, it appears to be Alpha testing since it'd be a first run...but that lingo is only for computer nerds anyways. Hey I'd be interested when I'm back in the spring.

[modius13]

I may drop in to do some play-testing as well in the spring. It depends on what my work schedule is.

Andrew: I agree with the pronounciation of lascannon. It will always be:
lascannon (laz'kanun) n., Big laser that goes FREEM! and melts armour

[Andrew]

Nice. How long since you've visited our fair forums? =P

[typo]

Hah, I actually pop onto the boards occasionally just to see what's up. The past year's just been tough to try to make time for gaming. I moved about a year ago, and pretty much all my minis and rulebooks were still in boxes from moving until about a month ago. Decided it was time to get some dice back on the table.

This game's built on a few concepts that I've been working with for quite a while now. It's actually an outgrowth of a game I prototyped for a few games about five years ago. At the time, it was fun but it had a few elements that drug the game down and made it far slower to play than I wanted. I think I've managed to find a better balance, though, and I think the version I'm working with now should be comparatively quick to play.

I'm pretty excited about this. I always have a few conceptual rulesets I'm tinkering with, but I've got a pretty good feeling here.

[typo]

Just a few updates as I continue work on this project:

The game will feature near-future, post-apocalyptic squad combat. Each player commands a single squad of mercenary troops fighting to survive in a devastated wasteland*.

Army lists will generally consist of between five and ten individual models. The game shouldn't feel small, however, since each model will have enough tactical depth to do the "work" of a whole unit in most systems. The small number of units will also allow the game to have a somewhat more realistic sense of scale than most games.

The system is designed to emphasize tactical gameplay over strategic planning. There will certainly be variety in army lists, but almost any army list should stand a chance if played correctly. "Rock-Paper-Scissors" design will be avoided. Anticipating your opponent and properly deploying and maneuvering your troops should be the biggest factor in securing victory.

Terrain and cover will play a very large part in the game. Terrain shapes, sizes, and layouts will be formalized in the rules, and constructing the layout of the table will be an important part of the game. Models can use various types of terrain as cover, and doing so will be vital to keeping models alive. Reading the sight lines on the table and determing how best to move through the board will be critical. Using suppressive fire to pin down and outmaneuver opponents will also play a significant role.

The game is currently being built around "symmetric" army lists. There aren't really "factions" like most games, all players choose from the same list of model archetypes (scouts, soldiers, heavy weapons, etc). Each list, however, includes a commander model with special rules that affect the other models in the list.

*The ruleset could really be adapted to any modern or sci-fi setting -- I have to admit that I'm settling on a post-apocalyptic setting in no small part because I'd love to build a terrain table of destroyed McMansions.

[typo]

I've got a few more details to share as my notes look more and more like a game.

Next steps will be getting the whole thing written up as a rough draft of a playable rule set, nailing down specific test stats for everything, and getting a few very preliminary playtests in just to make sure things are manageable.

The game's working title is Peacekeepers. I figured there were enough minis games with "war" in the name, right?

The main unique mechanic of the game comes at the beginning of each game round. Both players, in turn, issue "orders" to various models on their team by placing face-down counters next to units. "Orders" don't explicitly state what the model will do on the turn, they instead essentially grant bonuses if the model follows the "spirit" of the order.

For instance, a model given a "Move Out!" order will have increased movement range for the turn. A model with a combat order will have increased firepower should they attack. This is an oversimplification, but the gist is there. Success will depend on predicting your opponent's next intended actions and giving orders that capitalize on those predictions.

Since both players place their orders face down, it injects a degree of "simultaneous action" into the mix, which is something I've always liked in games. It doesn't, however, require players to fully determine their turns in secret. This hopefully keeps it from being too cumbersome as well as allowing a combination of both "predictive" and "reactive" tactics.

There are a few other unique systems to the game as it stands, but I definitely see the orders system as really the "core" defining element, in the way that, say, focus and feats define Warmachine or how attack and saving throws are big part of the "feel" of 40k.

Any comments or questions are appreciated. Thanks!

[typo]

Update:

The design is coming along. There's still a lot of elements I need to set to paper, but it's shaping up. I would say I have about 90% of the core rules "figured out" at this point. I think I'll have something of a playable ruleset available within a couple weeks.

My current vision of the completed game will have three factions for army lists, but I'm just developing a single faction for the sake of playtesting. Differentiating the armies can wait until the core mechanics have been tested out a bit.

Unfortunately, the friend I was hoping to run a few basic playtests with and brainstorm a bit with over break hasn't been available. If anybody's interested in brainstorming a bit (either in person or online), let me know.

[Leudast1215]

I'm still interested.