Striker 1e: Informed Amendments

"We're ready to have a good time with this game, Sir...

...if you can just get the mechanics to run a bit smoother!"

Well, the staff here has been working hard on just that, so let's see what we have...

I consider these "informed amendments" as these changes are mostly oriented around achieving a certain type of game flow, with certain technology, etc, after numerous playtests and close examination of the rule mechanics - including the math! Pictured below are numerous Fire rolls by a Team, to see results and if those results deliver the right "feel":

Goal1 with this permutation of Striker 1e on the table, was to use a TL that was more or less contemporary to test the "feel" that the game mechanics could provide.

The gauge for this was to balance all the variables [many variables...] for a result that 2 Teams Firing would usually force a Target team to  take a Morale Check with a 50% chance of  a "Suppressed" result. Pulling back to TL 9 and down put Striker 1e into my understanding of late Cold War conflicts and Iraq / Afghanistan, which made it easy to test "feel" in Striker 1e.

Goal 2. Striker 1e is a military / wargame supplement for an RPG system. It is therefore not immediately apparent how to throw a balanced game that fulfills the host's intentions - whether they are for a traditional 1-off Wargame, or part of the plot line of an ongoing Traveller 1e campaign.  I'm interested in understanding how to do either one, since I regularly host both an ongoing T1e campaign and 1-off wargames. Also, I have the miniatures needed for several historical and futuristic settings.  

So, I wanted to write up a short sheet of directions explaining how to set up a balanced game, complete with comparison of forces and terrain use, to hopefully achieve the goal.

Goal 3. Test the culture clash between RPGs v. Wargames that S1e sits astride.

RPGs often work at a relatively small level, and are much more personal than a wargame. So a typical Traveller campaign would likely have several characters and NPCs working in / with a small unit, probably just a squad or two, for an "encounter" that could be resolved with the T1e Book 1 & 3 encounter mechanics in a reasonable amount of time, say three hours. 

The closest that Wargaming gets to this is usually skirmish wargaming, perfectly exemplified by the Larry Brom classic "The Sword & The Flame", which encourages you to play about 20 figs a person and give each Soldier a name! More typical, especially today, is for a higher level of combat to be played, often a full company per player with a platoon as a "Game Unit". This is perfectly exemplified by the popular "Flames of War" WWII wargame, and its many derivative competitors. Altho a 1:1 scale game [where 1 fig = 1 Soldier, 1 vic = 1 vic], FoW leaves all those chaps as anonymous faces on the table, with only 1-2 heroic types a side being named and considered as individuals.

--> a subsidiary spin-off today is the small skirmish game that is similar in mechanics to the above FoW abstraction level, with small forces that are named.  As a fast-play narrative driven game, these are increasingly popular. 

There are a bunch of S1e game mechanics that are there to provide detailed information, mostly combat results, about every Soldier, crewed weapon, and vehicle. All of which is just fine for an RPG, where you are *most likely* going to be running a smaller fight, even if it is part of a larger campaign.

I like that they push the human factor and "real feel" of the game forward, into your face. It does, however, slow the game down and cause some confusion at times, at least until you are fluent in the game [as a GM/Referee should be!].

For example, altho Soldiers are organized into Teams of 4 and based together [generally], they shoot, get shot at, and are casualties as individuals. And casualties usually can't move, resulting in an awkward clash between the recommended basing and game play, where a Team of 4 that has a lightly wounded Veteran can sit in place and the Vet still fights; but Move, and he is left behind and "removed" from play.

Goal 4. Clarifying and separating the mechanics that deliver RPG-level details from those that deliver wargame manageable abstraction became another goal.

Smoothing out these wrinkles into two clear versions of the rules - one for RPG and one for Wargaming - makes S1e even more useful, as it can cover the sensibilities of both communities of players.

Summary of Mechanical Wrinkles, Infantry focus:

1. Turn Sequence [9] need modifications that Frank Chadwick [designer] included in all his subsequent games using this design: an initial Friendly Fire Phase. Teams can still [generally] only shoot once in their player turn and once in the opposing player turn. But, this allows a Shoot-->Move option, in addition to the already present Move-->Shoot option. The -2 penalty for moving and shooting may be needed if any movement is to be performed. Or Firing in Friendly Fire Phase 1 may result in one not being allowed to Move, depending on the TL and the units.
2. Rally [10.E]. The RAW game mechanic presently allows Leader to auto-rally all Forced Back and Routed Teams within 100m and Line of Sight. RPG style would have the Leader move into contact with those Teams for face-to-face encounter resolved with a Morale Check die roll.
3. Morale Check Failure [12.C] mechanics need to be streamlined; the few subtle differences between Pinned and Running away are over-engineered.
4. Spotting [14.D]. Should have a quality bonus for figs / Teams.
5. Direct Fire [17.B] resolution has RPG style four quality types of figure, all with different bonuses to Hit. Game style would use three Team Initiative levels instead; then the entire team can roll together, instead of separately.
6. Personnel Wound [28] effects are also resolved individually, RPG style, including a Fire penalty, Move penalty, and Removal. Needs abstracting to the net effect on a Team for a wargame.

Striker 1e Game Turn [modified]

Player 1 Player Turn
1.   P1 Command Phase
2.   P1 Prep Fire Phase
3.   P1 Move Phase
4.   P1 Advancing Fire Phase:
     a.   P2 Defensive Fire
     b.   P1 Advancing Fire
5.   Panic Check Phase

Player 2 Player Turn
1.   P2 Command Phase
2.   P2 Prep Fire Phase
3.   P2 Move Phase
4.   P2 Advancing Fire Phase:
     a.   P1 Defensive Fire
     b.   P2 Advancing Fire
5.   Panic Check Phase

These are the most significant of my "informed amendments", which ultimately are becoming two versions: one is RPG and single-figure focused, and the other is wargame focused, with only Leaders getting any individual figure rules.

Already playtesting these, and will shortly post on them, so "Stay Tuned"!