Jump to content

AICOM Wish List


Recommended Posts

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about AICOM, both the line of miniatures and the game itself. As such, below is my list of helpful suggestions (or, depending on how you look at it, unreasonable demands) for both.

1) Base the in game factions on Nations, not UCORs. I don’t like the idea of corporate soldiers killing each other for profit margin and market share. Just something about it that bugs me. Having said that . . .

2) Include the means to create your own Merc Company. Everybody likes to customize.

3) Include personal transports. I’m talking about things like bikes and Aliens style exo-skeletons/walkers. No real reason, other then the fact that I think it would be cool.

4) Helmetless Rach and Malvernus. Look at 40k, you can count on like one hand how many Eldar and T’au aren’t wearing those goofy looking helmets. If you’re going to have neat looking aliens, let us see them, please.

5) Variety. This is the big one. I’m going to collect and play the game, but I also would like to see models that I can use in sci-fi tabletop RPGs. That means characters dressed in clothing other then combat fatigues and military uniforms. I need scoundrels and gamblers and technicians. For example, I just picked up D20 Future by WotC, and as soon as I find some players I am going to run a game set in the Firefly universe created by Joss Whedon. I’d love to be able to have some minis I can use for it. Having said that . . .

6) No Razig or Arganox type models. Don’t get me wrong, I love the Warlord Razig, but I hate the fact that he and his crew are special scenario miniatures only. And Arganox isn’t useable in the game at all (unless you use him as a proxy for mercenary spearmen). If you make a miniature in the line, include it in the rules, please.

 

Okay, that’s everything I can think of. I’m really looking forward to AICOM, both the game and the line.

What does everyone else say?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 23
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

My biggest hope for the game is that it reflects, in some ways, actual infantry combat. Real grunts DO NOT stand shoulder to shoulder in a neat formation while being shot at. Cover is your friend. We duck behind it, we shoot out from behind it and we generally love nice thick pieces of stuff that stop those pesky bullets from killing us. We also don't clump up much, i.e. command distance. :wacko: Stupidest thing ever.

We are very, very fond of grenades, shoulder fired rockets/missiles and grenade launchers. We much prefer to kill you from a long way away than from ten feet away. Our rifles shoot 250+ plus meters and we practice a lot.

We like automatic weapons. We like them a lot. We love our .50 calibers and M-60's.

We like mines. A lot. We like smoke grenades to cover our movement. We like our buddies to be ready to shoot anyone intending us harm while we move from cover to cover. ( overwatch ).

We like it when the mortars or artillery can be brought to bear to kill you, thus saving us our valuable bullets.

We hate heavy stuff. Really, really, hate heavy stuff.

We absolutely positively do not believe in "fair fighting". There's no such thing on the two-way rifle range.

 

 

 

Now having said all that, don't bog the game down with silly rules like having to have a command section and a suppot section and an assault section....You get the idea.

I'd like to see variations in weapons. I tend to think the Rach would like up close and personal and the Adonese wouldn't. Design weapons accordingly. All the races have been at war for centuries and if the Rach love close weapons then give them the ability to get close without being slaughtered. It's sort of boring when there's a general homogenization of weapons. Let the various races have some personality and reflect it in their weapons and tactics.

 

I'll probably think up some more stuff while I'm outside mowing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only problem I see at this point with different weapon types and styles is that in the CAV universe we have now everyone pretty much has access to the same type of weapons just different models that do things a touch differently. a PBG is still a PBG

 

Now that said, if AICOM is being built from the RAGE system, the standard grunt is going to be close to uniform across the the system with changes in special abilities and small racial bumps.

 

As for Infantry types, I would love to see Heavy's and standard infantry, not sure if were gona get exo suits or not but that might be cool.

 

I could see grenades being represented as a very short range inf attack with a high soft number for frags?

 

Patrick "Mad Pat" Haughton

Dallas Texas

Link to post
Share on other sites
We much prefer to kill you from a long way away than from ten feet away. Our rifles shoot 250+ plus meters and we practice a lot.

Of course, at minis scale that means a minimum engagement distance of about 12 feet. That makes for some mighty big game tables!

 

^_^

 

PS

Link to post
Share on other sites
We much prefer to kill you from a long way away than from ten feet away. Our rifles shoot 250+ plus meters and we practice a lot. 

Of course, at minis scale that means a minimum engagement distance of about 12 feet. That makes for some mighty big game tables!

 

^_^

 

PS

I play CAV on an eight foot table now. ::): 60+ inches is not an unreasonable distance for an aimed rifle shot at that scale. Especially if it has some sort of aimpoint style optic. By 2267 the Terran's better have them!..LOL We have them now!

 

 

My opinion has always been, based on the size tables we play on, if you can see it you should be able to shoot it. Or at least at it. Even a 60mm mortar shoots about 3,000 meters in real life.

 

Infantry combat is dangerous and deadly. I hope AICOM reflects this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My thoughts from the two perspectives (gameplay, minis):

 

1. Gameplay - Being a 20+ year player of CBT. The thing that still to this day continues to cause the most arguments is the fact that some people like to try and make the GAME as realistic to real life as possible, especially when it comes to gun ranges, true sense of damage, etc..

 

Its a game, and people have to somehow accept it for that. and as a game there are some things that have to be sacrificed in order to make it playable.

 

I am not saying that the issues cannot be addressed in the game, just saying that don't expect it to fit to scale and all that as RL.

 

 

2. Minis - Have to agree and disagree with you Bachelor. I agree there needs to be more than just soldiers (technicians, medics, spies, communications, mercs, etc..) but I will disagree with your reasoning.

 

If I were Reaper. Then I care about making minis for my game. I couln't care less about supplying you minis so that you can go play somebody else's game.

 

I am more in agreement with Spartan's assessment of the minis. Variety of poses. Give me a squad of soldiers, where one is standing, one crouching, one laying down, maybe one running. Then make slightly different poses for each faction, nation or whatever. '

 

But, having said that, don't make the poses so dynamic or whatnot that they are only show pieces and cant be used on a game table.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is a problem with trying to mix realism and simulation with games. At one end of the scale, it stops being fun as a game and etners the real of number crunching simulation. At the other end, it sacrifices realism for the fun factor. It's tricky to find that balance inbetween - but I can sympathize with what you are saying.

 

I think it's dumb that in the future a dude can have a big tank bristling with weapons and can only seem to move and fire one of them - so the tank just becomes a big pillbox with treads.

 

On the otherhand, I would think ordinance in the future could easily blow half a table clean of life with a single shot, and that isn't very much fun in a game.

 

Overwatch is a good thing, I think and works well on a skirmish level game. Not so good on a bigger scale because it starts to bog the mechanics of the game down.

 

Automaic weapons = good. I thinK Starguard has some fairly decent rules for automatic fire... they can get particularly devistating though... Yes this is realistic...no, sometimes it's just not fun to see your side evaporate after a single turn.. but I don't think they are that harsh.

 

Is the M60 still in use? I thought it was replaced with the 249 in squads and the 240b on vehicles. Point taken though...just a minor nitpicky thing. :)

 

 

My wish list....

 

I love the AICOMM grunt green, but the way he is holding his rifle and sighting down it seems kinda... off. Perhaps it's for scultping and casting purposes - and I'm totally willing to give creative licensing here. A quick google image search for "Rifle standing position" will show what I mean... but like I said, it's a super minor quibble and in the grand scheme of things doesn't matter (especially with such a greatr looking model)

 

I'd like to see the Sci-Fi line develop like the fantasy line, with perhaps general sci-fi characters that can be used for a specific reaper game, or any other game or RPG you might be playing. It seems like most of the Reaper Dark Heaven figures are being bought up my RPG players for their games.

 

More gunts, please. :)

And Soon!

 

I think there is a great variety in the Dark Heaven line, and hope the same could be done with Sci-FI. I'm not sure what the market will bear however - but I'm curious how many people use their Void or GW models for other games and rule-sets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
We much prefer to kill you from a long way away than from ten feet away. Our rifles shoot 250+ plus meters and we practice a lot. 

Of course, at minis scale that means a minimum engagement distance of about 12 feet. That makes for some mighty big game tables!

 

^_^

 

PS

I play CAV on an eight foot table now. ::): 60+ inches is not an unreasonable distance for an aimed rifle shot at that scale. Especially if it has some sort of aimpoint style optic. By 2267 the Terran's better have them!..LOL We have them now!

 

 

My opinion has always been, based on the size tables we play on, if you can see it you should be able to shoot it. Or at least at it. Even a 60mm mortar shoots about 3,000 meters in real life.

 

Infantry combat is dangerous and deadly. I hope AICOM reflects this.

Those ranges are perfectly reasonable on a CAV scale, but those AICOM guys are 28mm! ::P:

 

So your 8 foot table is too short by half.

 

PS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Spartan, the m16 shoots at 250+ correct. what is your first sighting range increment? That's usually the range most game systems place in mind for their ranges in the game.

 

I mean sure we can make all sorts of charts and distance ratings to allow us to shoot at anything on the table. Which would be kinda cool.. but where do we draw the line for ease of use.

 

its easier to play and state this weapon has a "in game" combat effective range of "blah"

 

I think the main weapons we'll see are G11's, FA-45, would be cool to see AT-23's and mortars.

 

I do kinda like the idea of grenades being very short range Indirect attacks..be kinda a cool element. how many inches do you guys think a grunt could throw a grenade accurately?

 

Patrick "Mad Pat" Haughton

Dallas Texas

Link to post
Share on other sites

Grenade accuracy varies really widely. I saw a guy bounce practice grenade after practice grenade off the top of a 55 gallon drum over and over at 75 yards. I've also seen guys that can't pitch one in a 20 foot circle from 100 feet away.

 

 

As far as the range thing goes, if you can be shot at the end of the table, you better seek cover ::P: lol

 

 

 

 

We still have a few 60's laying around. Most of the active duty units have the 240B and the 249 SAW.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so lets say we give a range of LOS for 99% of the weapons on the table, at what point to we add or subtract numbers from the attack bonus?

 

It would deffently set the game apart.

 

How then do we also put range limits on such things as side arms, CQB weapons, shotguns?

 

as for Grenades, soo say 50yrd for a good middle ground range for throw grenades, that gives us a middle ground between the 75yrd super soldier and my girlfriends grenade performance at Basic (hey at least she didn't drop it like on girl)

 

Patrick "Mad Pat" Haughton

Dallas Texas

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok so lets say we give a range of LOS for 99% of the weapons on the table, at what point to we add or subtract numbers from the attack bonus?

 

 

How then do we also put range limits on such things as side arms, CQB weapons, shotguns?

Make accuracy at a given range dependant on troop quality? Green level troops shoot crappy, Elites shoot really well ?

 

Maybe something like this:

 

0-12 inches +1

12.1-24 +0

24.1 - 36 -1

36.1-48 -2

48-60 -3

 

High quality troops won't notice the negative modifiers so much.

 

 

 

Shotguns aren't really much use past about 25 yards shooting 00 buck. The pattern spreads out too much and troops all hyped on adrenalin don't notice a single pellet to a non-critical area. Slugs are a different story. With some iron sights on a slug gun you have a reasonable chance of hitting out around 100 yards. A hollow point sabot slug hitting you anywhere is going to pretty much ruin your week.

 

 

I've always felt a reasonable pistol shot is around 35-40 yards when you're instinct shooting. A couple seconds to aim will take that out to 50 yards easy. I'm talking about a man size target.

 

 

How do you define a CQB weapon? I've seen entry teams use everything from shotguns to Beretta 93-R's. My personal favorite is a pistol. I'm a much better pistol shooter than a rifle shooter. I also prefer something .40 S&W or larger but nothing above .45. Anything larger causes too much felt recoil and causes your second shot to almost always miss high or right. Friends of mine all have their favorites. One favors a shotgun, another a bullet hose in 9mm. Whatever makes you feel warm and fuzzy and dissuades the bad guys from returning fire.

 

 

 

50 yards is acceptable to me as a baseline grenade throw with about a 80% chance of putting it within ten feet of where you meant too.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Don't misunderstand, by noooo stretch of the imagination do I want to see AICOM devolve into Advanced Squad Leader. THAT game truly sucks. I'm not even into that much realism in a game. I would however like to see a skirmish game with nice long weapon ranges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With appropriate to hit modifiers built in I don't see why it wouldn't be possible to have a skirmish level game with standard grunt rifles with ranges past 8ft thus, see it shoot at it. I think personally that would make for quite a significant change over most games of its type.

 

If we go with the theory that most long arms will have line of sight range, and scale the smaller weapons down to reasonable ranges, I think it would be pretty cool. Your idea of range modifiers that could be over come by skill level works pretty well also.

 

Add in modifiers for bracing and other shooting techniques and it wouldn't be that complicated, yet still have a pretty good game.

 

now....since its all gona use the RAGE system...lets take our squad of 5 grunts and go ork hunting *Grin*

 

Patrick "Mad Pat" Haughton

Dallas Texas

Link to post
Share on other sites

hehehehe :ph34r:

 

 

If a grunt had actions... say three actions per turn, then you could brace,shoot,move... move,brace shoot... shoot,shoot,move...shoot,shoot,shoot.....move, shoot, move ...etc..etc...

 

 

Or something like, ready grenade, throw grenade, move. You get the idea.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...