I had very little free time today, and what little I had I spent on TWW:PG. But I did get some Felltower work done, because I make sure to every Sunday.
- I updated the VTT files - the GURPS module, add-ons, and the basic Foundry build.
- I updated the rumors.
- I did a small bit of stocking of one corner of the dungeon I had been avoiding doing any work on.
- I did a little research for one of the gate destinations.
I've been running silent on the blog because of little to write and a lot of non-blog work to do. But the campaign should kick back up into gear once we're past summer. It usually does.
Sunday, August 18, 2024
Wednesday, August 14, 2024
TWW: Persian Gulf update
I've played a few more turns of Frank Chadwick's Third World War series game, Persian Gulf.
It's been a hot mess.
At the moment, we're just starting Pact First Impulse for War Turn 4.*
- the conflict went nuclear as fast as possible. On the end of War Turn 1. It narrowly avoided going from level 1 to level 2 last turn. All of this benefits the Pact, since Soviet forces get 2:1 on artillery/short range tactical nukes.
- the Pact luck on airpower kept up for 2 more weeks (turns). The RDF B-52 wing was out with maintenance issues for 2 weeks. They shot down the precious A-10s and turned about the AV-8Bs once as well. Severely weather kept the Western Asian theatre out of threat from NATO airpower.
- The Syrians got massacred. Their entire expeditionary force was wiped out after a severe brusing with the Iraqis. They tried to limp home but the Turks crushed them.
- The US 24th ID (real world - become the 4th ID) and a tank bridge and a few assorted units rushed a Soviet force and mauled them badly . . . but when the conflict went nuclear, they suffered from the exchanges. The 4th ID and attacked armored brigade barely escaped destruction, and were mauled badly enough to need to flee to the coast and to get evacuated to Saudi Arabia (well, Bahrain anyway) for reconstituion. In game terms, they have proficiency 7 and took 6 disruptions each. Ouch.
- The Soviet's first wave of reinforcements arrived while the Turks were finishing off the Syrians. Looking at the board, I chose a different approach. In the past, I'd used them to backstop my Iran positions and try to finish off American units. This time, Turkey seemed vulnerable. So I had them rush Turkey . . . and it worked. They smoked most of the defenses and are now debauching into northern Iraq.
- The US had to back off, the Jordanians are surrounded in Iran in Kurdistan, the Kurds have been mauled, the Turks are mauled, and there is little left of the rebel centrist Iranian army.
- But then, the worm turned a bit. A Soviet gambit to finish off the 24th ID cost them a Motor-Rifle Division (in NATO parlance, a mechanized division) . . . in fact thei best one (it was 9-9-6, when front line units in Germany are 10-9-6 and most on the flanks are 7-7-5). And then weather cleared over Western Asia, the B-52s were back in action . . . and turn 4 began.
- The US was able to, finally, use the B-52s for deep strike missions, and went after logistical depots. The B-52s inflicted 46 brigades worth of unsupplied markers in one massive strike. The Soviets had 43 brigades in theatre. So suddenly, the Pact units whooping it up and chasing the mauled RDF to the coast are unsupplied. There aren't remotely enough units to deprive to change this much (using emergency supply redirection to keep the key units in supply), but we'll see. If the US can keep this up, it might change the war. If not, this is a brief respite before the Soviets finish off the rebel units in Iran and crush most if not all of Iraq. We'll see.
* Turns are interesting. Once you do some preliminaries, you get Pact First Impulse, a second phase for Pact units not in a ZOC, then a NATO Reserve Impulse for units not in a ZOC, then a Pact Second Impulse and second phase, then two NATO phases. It's all based on doctrinal assumptions about how both sides make war. Potentially, a Pact unit can move 4x and recover damage 2x; a NATO unit 3x and 3x. Usually it's less thanks to ZOCs (zones of control) and movement.
It's been a hot mess.
At the moment, we're just starting Pact First Impulse for War Turn 4.*
- the conflict went nuclear as fast as possible. On the end of War Turn 1. It narrowly avoided going from level 1 to level 2 last turn. All of this benefits the Pact, since Soviet forces get 2:1 on artillery/short range tactical nukes.
- the Pact luck on airpower kept up for 2 more weeks (turns). The RDF B-52 wing was out with maintenance issues for 2 weeks. They shot down the precious A-10s and turned about the AV-8Bs once as well. Severely weather kept the Western Asian theatre out of threat from NATO airpower.
- The Syrians got massacred. Their entire expeditionary force was wiped out after a severe brusing with the Iraqis. They tried to limp home but the Turks crushed them.
- The US 24th ID (real world - become the 4th ID) and a tank bridge and a few assorted units rushed a Soviet force and mauled them badly . . . but when the conflict went nuclear, they suffered from the exchanges. The 4th ID and attacked armored brigade barely escaped destruction, and were mauled badly enough to need to flee to the coast and to get evacuated to Saudi Arabia (well, Bahrain anyway) for reconstituion. In game terms, they have proficiency 7 and took 6 disruptions each. Ouch.
- The Soviet's first wave of reinforcements arrived while the Turks were finishing off the Syrians. Looking at the board, I chose a different approach. In the past, I'd used them to backstop my Iran positions and try to finish off American units. This time, Turkey seemed vulnerable. So I had them rush Turkey . . . and it worked. They smoked most of the defenses and are now debauching into northern Iraq.
- The US had to back off, the Jordanians are surrounded in Iran in Kurdistan, the Kurds have been mauled, the Turks are mauled, and there is little left of the rebel centrist Iranian army.
- But then, the worm turned a bit. A Soviet gambit to finish off the 24th ID cost them a Motor-Rifle Division (in NATO parlance, a mechanized division) . . . in fact thei best one (it was 9-9-6, when front line units in Germany are 10-9-6 and most on the flanks are 7-7-5). And then weather cleared over Western Asia, the B-52s were back in action . . . and turn 4 began.
- The US was able to, finally, use the B-52s for deep strike missions, and went after logistical depots. The B-52s inflicted 46 brigades worth of unsupplied markers in one massive strike. The Soviets had 43 brigades in theatre. So suddenly, the Pact units whooping it up and chasing the mauled RDF to the coast are unsupplied. There aren't remotely enough units to deprive to change this much (using emergency supply redirection to keep the key units in supply), but we'll see. If the US can keep this up, it might change the war. If not, this is a brief respite before the Soviets finish off the rebel units in Iran and crush most if not all of Iraq. We'll see.
* Turns are interesting. Once you do some preliminaries, you get Pact First Impulse, a second phase for Pact units not in a ZOC, then a NATO Reserve Impulse for units not in a ZOC, then a Pact Second Impulse and second phase, then two NATO phases. It's all based on doctrinal assumptions about how both sides make war. Potentially, a Pact unit can move 4x and recover damage 2x; a NATO unit 3x and 3x. Usually it's less thanks to ZOCs (zones of control) and movement.
Friday, August 9, 2024
Random Thoughts & Links for 8/9/2024
Busy week, just a few bits.
- I'm reading Jon Peterson's new book. It's good, and it does have some details on the early days of gaming that the first volume didn't, but it's not so dense as the first one. Much more readable for someone who just wants to learn the history, but I did enjoy the deep detail of the 1st edition of Playing at the World.
- I really need to link up all of the recent sessions on the DF campaign page. I've just been doing too much other stuff to take a moment to do that.
- I forgot to mention that hidden GM rolls seemed to work just fine last game session. It really makes a big difference for us when they are on versus when they are off.
- So busy these past few days that I didn't have time to play any more Persian Gulf. I need to complete it by early next week, so I expect a marathon of turns on Sunday and Monday.
- I'm reading Jon Peterson's new book. It's good, and it does have some details on the early days of gaming that the first volume didn't, but it's not so dense as the first one. Much more readable for someone who just wants to learn the history, but I did enjoy the deep detail of the 1st edition of Playing at the World.
- I really need to link up all of the recent sessions on the DF campaign page. I've just been doing too much other stuff to take a moment to do that.
- I forgot to mention that hidden GM rolls seemed to work just fine last game session. It really makes a big difference for us when they are on versus when they are off.
- So busy these past few days that I didn't have time to play any more Persian Gulf. I need to complete it by early next week, so I expect a marathon of turns on Sunday and Monday.
Thursday, August 8, 2024
Felltower: Upcoming Game Dates
Thanks to the Summer scheduling messes, the next Felltower game day is 8/25. I'll have posts in between, but no summaries until then.
Tuesday, August 6, 2024
DF Felltower: Sage Research Results for the Pool of Fire
Here are the results of the research request on the flaming pool.
- It's almost certainly a mostly one-way gate from the Realm of Fire, one of the elemental worlds.
- It matches the description of other one-way gates from such places in all of the important particulars - ever-burning oil, supernaturally hot flames.
- such gates are two-way only for beings of fire, but might be the outflow from a normal gate in the Realm of Fire - in other words, it might be an exit even if you can't use it as an entrance.
- the "hemisphere" that Hannari briefly fondled - the sage insisted on the word choice "fondled" - is likely part or all of some kind of salamander or flame beast akin to flame lords. It almost certainly pulled back when it encountered something it couldn't burn.
- Whatever Hannari fondled, it will be aware of your existence now. Be careful around the gate as fire creatures could come through.
- It's possible other pools in the room are the same. Although it's also possible that they are not. But one-way exit gates are more likely than two-way gates.
And that's all.
- It's almost certainly a mostly one-way gate from the Realm of Fire, one of the elemental worlds.
- It matches the description of other one-way gates from such places in all of the important particulars - ever-burning oil, supernaturally hot flames.
- such gates are two-way only for beings of fire, but might be the outflow from a normal gate in the Realm of Fire - in other words, it might be an exit even if you can't use it as an entrance.
- the "hemisphere" that Hannari briefly fondled - the sage insisted on the word choice "fondled" - is likely part or all of some kind of salamander or flame beast akin to flame lords. It almost certainly pulled back when it encountered something it couldn't burn.
- Whatever Hannari fondled, it will be aware of your existence now. Be careful around the gate as fire creatures could come through.
- It's possible other pools in the room are the same. Although it's also possible that they are not. But one-way exit gates are more likely than two-way gates.
And that's all.
Monday, August 5, 2024
TWW: Persian Gulf update
I decided after all to keep playing TWW: Persian Gulf as is.
I probably needn't have worried too much about the Soviets. They've steamrolled their way south, demolishing the few rebel units in their path and seizing a few important locations along the way. They managed to get as far as seizing Abadan and Shiraz. They had phenomenal luck with air defenses, and bad luck with ground attacks. The US tried to stop their steamroll with a B52 strike - which a lucky "6" aborted, and with an F-16 attack (halved by AA). Ground fire also aborted an A-10 deployment against one attack. Only some USMC AV-8Bs (Harriers) managed to get useful ground support in. But low rolls on the attacks meant they dealt damage but suffered disruptions across the board. Same with a Syrian attack on Iraqi units, which did nothing but bruise everyone.
However, the US RDF has landed and struck back. The first direct US vs. USSR fighting on the ground was a counterattack on Abadan. The Soviets held it with two MRDs (Motorized Rifle Divisions, which are mechanized infantry). The US counterattacked with the 82nd Airborne (airborne infantry), a helicopter brigade, the 9th Light Mechanized Division (light motorized, a division that never came to be as the game envisioned it), and some Iraqi units - some Revolutionary Guard tanks plus regular infantry and armored. The MRDs were forced to retreat and disrupted heavily passing through ZOCs on their way out. A Jordanian expeditionary force took Bakhtaran with some light Kurdish help. And the Iraqis counterattacked the Syrians and achieved as much as the Syrians had - mutual bruising, with the Iraqi suffering a lot of units damaged to two Syrian units banged up. Still, they're fixed in play with the Turks nearby . . . not that they can coordinate attacks as they're rival nations.
And the Iranian army, fighting on both sides, has suffered about 50% of so casualties in effective units. Ouch. The IRG took losses, too, but they can recruit replacements.
FWIW, if you're familiar with the game, I am using the Chemical Warfare rules, which inflicts extra damage on non-NBC equipped troops and reduces damage if one side doesn't have CW and the other does. It's a fun rule that makes the minor powers really minor, and what might be a soft target a bit harder when they'll use nerve gas against your unsuited troops.
The aborted A-10 mission was a godsend to the Soviets because they provide a 4-column shift in odds. Your 6-1 attack becomes 2-1, for example, and 3-1 becomes 1-2 (1.5-1 is a column). It stayed 6-1. And aborting that B52 strike was potentially short-term game-shifting. Most air units have a rating for air-to-air, ground attack, and strike ranging from 0-5. The Tu-96 Blackjacks have a 6. Otherwise, the heaviest strike wings have a 5. The B52? 10. That's enough to reliably inflict 2-3 disruptions on every unit struck, and potentially 10. The elite of the elite are eliminated with 9 disruptions, and most US units have 7, 8 for the elite, and Soviets 5, 6 or 7 for the elite. Oh, and it slows movement. No worries, AA got the mission nullified. It could have wrecked two soviet divisions right next to US forces that could counterattack . . . instead, nothing at all.
Now it's War Turn 1. I'll pick up there next time.
Overall, my strategy for the Soviets has been damn the torpedoes full speed ahead. I'll spend units like bullets if I have to in order to take cities for the victory points, and I'll need a big whack of them and some luck in the air war to crush the RDF. But the US doesn't get a lot of reinforcements, so do I slow it down and let the reinforcing armies roll up and make a big final push with everyone? I'm not sure. We'll see what it looks like after the Turks enter the war and if the Syrians can survive.
I probably needn't have worried too much about the Soviets. They've steamrolled their way south, demolishing the few rebel units in their path and seizing a few important locations along the way. They managed to get as far as seizing Abadan and Shiraz. They had phenomenal luck with air defenses, and bad luck with ground attacks. The US tried to stop their steamroll with a B52 strike - which a lucky "6" aborted, and with an F-16 attack (halved by AA). Ground fire also aborted an A-10 deployment against one attack. Only some USMC AV-8Bs (Harriers) managed to get useful ground support in. But low rolls on the attacks meant they dealt damage but suffered disruptions across the board. Same with a Syrian attack on Iraqi units, which did nothing but bruise everyone.
However, the US RDF has landed and struck back. The first direct US vs. USSR fighting on the ground was a counterattack on Abadan. The Soviets held it with two MRDs (Motorized Rifle Divisions, which are mechanized infantry). The US counterattacked with the 82nd Airborne (airborne infantry), a helicopter brigade, the 9th Light Mechanized Division (light motorized, a division that never came to be as the game envisioned it), and some Iraqi units - some Revolutionary Guard tanks plus regular infantry and armored. The MRDs were forced to retreat and disrupted heavily passing through ZOCs on their way out. A Jordanian expeditionary force took Bakhtaran with some light Kurdish help. And the Iraqis counterattacked the Syrians and achieved as much as the Syrians had - mutual bruising, with the Iraqi suffering a lot of units damaged to two Syrian units banged up. Still, they're fixed in play with the Turks nearby . . . not that they can coordinate attacks as they're rival nations.
And the Iranian army, fighting on both sides, has suffered about 50% of so casualties in effective units. Ouch. The IRG took losses, too, but they can recruit replacements.
FWIW, if you're familiar with the game, I am using the Chemical Warfare rules, which inflicts extra damage on non-NBC equipped troops and reduces damage if one side doesn't have CW and the other does. It's a fun rule that makes the minor powers really minor, and what might be a soft target a bit harder when they'll use nerve gas against your unsuited troops.
The aborted A-10 mission was a godsend to the Soviets because they provide a 4-column shift in odds. Your 6-1 attack becomes 2-1, for example, and 3-1 becomes 1-2 (1.5-1 is a column). It stayed 6-1. And aborting that B52 strike was potentially short-term game-shifting. Most air units have a rating for air-to-air, ground attack, and strike ranging from 0-5. The Tu-96 Blackjacks have a 6. Otherwise, the heaviest strike wings have a 5. The B52? 10. That's enough to reliably inflict 2-3 disruptions on every unit struck, and potentially 10. The elite of the elite are eliminated with 9 disruptions, and most US units have 7, 8 for the elite, and Soviets 5, 6 or 7 for the elite. Oh, and it slows movement. No worries, AA got the mission nullified. It could have wrecked two soviet divisions right next to US forces that could counterattack . . . instead, nothing at all.
Now it's War Turn 1. I'll pick up there next time.
Overall, my strategy for the Soviets has been damn the torpedoes full speed ahead. I'll spend units like bullets if I have to in order to take cities for the victory points, and I'll need a big whack of them and some luck in the air war to crush the RDF. But the US doesn't get a lot of reinforcements, so do I slow it down and let the reinforcing armies roll up and make a big final push with everyone? I'm not sure. We'll see what it looks like after the Turks enter the war and if the Syrians can survive.
Sunday, August 4, 2024
Favoring humans in DF Felltower: Setting Bias
I mentioned in the comments on my proposed DF rules option for humans that DF Felltower biases a bit towards humans.
So, how does DF Felltower bias towards humans?
None of it is a big bias; nothing here makes it harder to be non-human. But it is all stuff that makes it easier on you as a human.
Most equipment found is SM 0. That's fine for a good number of non-human races, but is fine for 100% of humans, even the SM+1 ones.
Most armor found is SM 0 and human-shaped. So elves might have a bit of an issue; dwarves definitely do.
Most NPCs are human, and on the whole are more likely to show up as friends or enemies. Advantages that are race-affected or don't cross racial barriers are more limited for non-humans. And there are races that have special antipathy for elves, for dwarves, for half-elves, for halflings, etc. - but not any with a special hatred for humans that doesn't also hit the human-adjacent races.
In short, the world assumes a human majority, places the campaign in a human-majority location, and provides most gear for humans first and to non-humans as an afterthought. Humans might not get the nice little power jump that most non-humans get, but they get a bias across the board in the setting towards them.
So, how does DF Felltower bias towards humans?
None of it is a big bias; nothing here makes it harder to be non-human. But it is all stuff that makes it easier on you as a human.
Most equipment found is SM 0. That's fine for a good number of non-human races, but is fine for 100% of humans, even the SM+1 ones.
Most armor found is SM 0 and human-shaped. So elves might have a bit of an issue; dwarves definitely do.
Most NPCs are human, and on the whole are more likely to show up as friends or enemies. Advantages that are race-affected or don't cross racial barriers are more limited for non-humans. And there are races that have special antipathy for elves, for dwarves, for half-elves, for halflings, etc. - but not any with a special hatred for humans that doesn't also hit the human-adjacent races.
In short, the world assumes a human majority, places the campaign in a human-majority location, and provides most gear for humans first and to non-humans as an afterthought. Humans might not get the nice little power jump that most non-humans get, but they get a bias across the board in the setting towards them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
