Rules

Monday, 22 January 2024

Watch Out! The enemy are moving during your turn

As a mainly a solo wargamer, I often employ different activation approaches to introduce a level of unpredictability into my games. This can involve using the traditional I-Go You-Go turn based approach activating all the army units at once with chance cards adding a level of uncertainty; or a unit by unit activation approach where each unit dices for its activation and a failed activation roll either ends the active player's turn or prevents the unit from activating during the turn. All too often, it seems, units can frustratingly fail to activate on consecutive turns. Anyway, in recent games with my Samurai armies I have found neither of these methods are really working for me and providing the type of game I am looking for.

The setup for a recent game.

While I do favour the unit activation approach, because it seems to fit well with the feudal nature of Samurai warfare, particularly when gaming large skirmish games which are more free wheeling affairs. For larger battles where units represent larger bodies of troops it can be frustrating. In these situations, the units should be expected to generally follow orders, even if they are slow in following through with their orders and giving the enemy a chance to react first.

Another game in progress.

One activation approach I do like is from a Ganesha games, where one or multiple dice can be rolled with each successful roll, allowing the player to perform an action. However, with a single failed roll, the opposing player gets a chance to react, and two failures ends the player’s turn. This reactive element prompted me to consider trying the following activation approach where on a player’s turn they get the opportunity to activate all their units. However, each time they activate a unit they must first roll a dice to test to see if the opposing player reacts before their activation. 

The simple rule is, if you roll a 3 or higher for the reaction test, the opponent doesn't get a chance to react. But if you roll a 1 or 2, the opposing player can try to react with one of their units, so long as it hasn't successfully reacted already in the turn. They will need themselves to roll a 3 or higher to succeed with a reaction. If they do, they can take advantage of the opportunity to, for example: shoot, move a unit out of harm’s way, block a flanking move by advancing their own unit, or launch a counter charge.

The reactive dice roll of 3+ can be influenced by the following factors:

  • -1 The unit is in or moving into difficult terrain (crossing a river, climbing a hill, etc.)
  • -1  For an allied unit with questionable loyal to the Daimyo.
  • +1  The Daimyo is attached to the unit.
  • +1  No enemy units are visible within 12 inches (my maximum movement allowance).
  • +1  An urgent order has been dispatched. I permit one order to be delivered to a unit at the beginning of a player's turn, reducing the risk of enemy interference during its actions. (Note - this does not apply to reaction attempts by the opposing player.)
Here are some examples…

A Red unit of Samurai are going to charge the Blue Ashigaru unit. They roll a 2 (black dice) and allow the opportunity for Blue to react, which they successfully do with a 4, and are able to fire their arquebuses before the Samurai charge in.  

In the same situation, an order has been sent for the Samurai to charge, marked by the messenger (Tsukai-ban) wearing a “horo” on his back. This adds 1 to the dice roll of 2 and in this case there will be no reaction opportunity. 

This approach allows a player to follow through with their plans activating all the units they want as you can with an I-Go You-Go method, while presenting the opposition the occasional opportunity to react and attempt to spoil or disrupt the other’s plans. I now need to play a few more games and if all goes well update my rules.
The Daimyo’s headquarters with Maku screen. The Tsukai-ban can be just seen inside getting new orders.


18 comments:

  1. Interesting mechanism, Peter. Is allowing a possible reaction upon each Active Player's unit activation too much do you think?

    Great to see your Samurai Armies out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Always good to get the colourful samurai out on the tabletop. Generally, I have been getting 1 reaction each turn with an army with 6 units. The orders and assigned general reduce the chance for two units causing a reaction. There is the option of allowing 2 orders per turn to decrease the likelihood of reactions further. But a reacting unit still has to roll a 3+ to react.

      Delete
  2. Interesting idea. I use "event cards" in my games, and a player can play an event card to "interrupt" the activation sequence of the opposing player. Sort of the same idea, but different implementation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do like event cards, they can create great narratives for games.

      Delete
  3. It's randomised (i.e. the player has to make decisions on how much to do with a unit and whether it's worth the cost) but if you like the idea of reactions have you looked at the turn sequence in the 'Charge of the Light Brigade' rules - probably best in head-to-head games rather than solo games but worth a look as it's quite interesting. See link:
    https://hmgs-midsouth.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Nashcon2014-Balaclava-scenario-and-Rules-small.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  4. That looks an interesting method Peter. I’m all for friction in games.
    Jonathon Freitag introduced an activation tweak in recent games (see his AARs on Madonna dell’Olmo) whereby 2 neutral dice pulled from the activation bucket in a turn result in an immediate end to the turn. This makes players concentrate on key activations (don’t leave the best til last!).
    Chris/Nundanket

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Chris/Nundanket. It is nice mechanic for stopping one moving all of one’s army and creating tension.

      Delete
  5. Hi Peter - this looks like a good approach, particularly for big battles. It reminds me (slightly) of the reaction system in "Iron Cross" (not as sophisticated as your method outlined here) and when played with 2 or more players it makes for a very tense and exciting game.
    Looking forward to seeing g this played out on your table

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, writing up a game report is one of the next items on my list for the blog.

      Delete
  6. I never got along with the Songs of series by Gnasha games. It made for some wonky mess and left me cold. Your idea is an improvement and does suit large armies pretty well.
    Can the battery fire before the infantry closes type of tests. đŸ˜€

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When playing Song of series I liked the skirmish games where each figure represented an individual. As for battery fire, it depends on the range used, generally infantry need more than 3 moves to close.

      Delete
  7. Yes, this is another good idea Peter - it is a bit like a randomized 'overwatch" or, as Steve (Disgruntled Fusilier) says, something along the lines of the "Iron Cross" interruption rule - obviously, for solo play, it needs to be a "luck of the dice" system, but none the worse for that!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A randomised overwatch is a good way of describing it. For solo games it adds the uncertainly, and one could go as far as only having reactions for the opponent if the opposing army was directed by dice or priority lists.

      Delete
  8. what a great idea, I shall use this in my solo games. perhaps i can tweak it so that good quality units will be less likely to give the opposition time to react and more likely to react themselves. and the opposite be true for poor quality troops.
    i do enjoy your blog it amazes me how you come up with so many good ideas. thanks john.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi John, at the moment I am playing with 6-7 units per side. One will have the commander and another a direct order which halves the likelihood of a reaction to a roll of 1. This would be replaced by your troop quality approach.

      Delete
  9. Sounds like a really good mechanism. I'll be interested to read what tweaks you make after further play testing. I guess action/reaction should even out across both sides in a game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am happily play testing away at the moment. Gaming with 6-7 units per army I am getting 1 reaction mostly per turn by using the direct order and commander (Daimyo) which avoid a reaction with a 2+, and not all units are attempting to activate being in reserve. If I wanted to reduce the likelihood of reactions I would make a successful reaction need a 4+ by the opposition.

      Delete