Poll

What kind of game do you want?

A Time of War RPG campaign, Before Clan
4 (16%)
A Time of War RPG campaign, After Clan
4 (16%)
Small Scale Grand Strategy campaign, Before Clan
2 (8%)
Small Scale Grand Strategy campaign, After Clan
1 (4%)
Large Scale Grand Strategy campaign, Before Clan
5 (20%)
Large Scale Grand Strategy campaign, After Clan
5 (20%)
I am not interested in any of the above options (Explain)
1 (4%)
I am interested in more than one of the above options (Explain)
3 (12%)

Total Members Voted: 25

Author Topic: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One  (Read 9829 times)

Terminax

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1185
  • Never despair. Never surrender.
Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« on: 30 May 2013, 11:08:57 »
Please read the entire post before voting.

In an effort to focus in what kind of game you want to play or GM, I'm presenting you two options for three different campaigns. The first option is Before Clan which covers the time period from the Age of War to the War of 3039. The second option is After Clan which covers the time period from the Clan Invasion to the Dark Age.

The three different campaigns are: A Time of War campaign, Small Scale Grand Strategy campaign or Large Scale Grand Strategy campaign. An ATOW campaign focuses on players playing individual characters. A Small Scale GS campaign focuses on players playing small states or individual units in a limited region. A large scale GS campaign focuses on players playing the major powers of the Battletech universe.

You may also vote for none of the above.

After voting on your choice, please post what your choice was and any comments/questions you may have. Please don't be silent, for without your voice this is an exercise in futility.

Arkaris

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 235
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #1 on: 30 May 2013, 11:41:04 »
My preference is None of the Above,

I'd much rather GM a Clan Homeworld game, before the invasion.  But I will help GM any type of game that people would want to play.

Klingon

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 112
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #2 on: 30 May 2013, 11:53:11 »
Would have liked to be able to vote for more than one, because about half those choices would have been fine for me.

Terminax

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1185
  • Never despair. Never surrender.
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #3 on: 30 May 2013, 12:12:41 »
If you setup the poll right, you can change your choice.

Klingon

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 112
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #4 on: 30 May 2013, 13:49:16 »
If you setup the poll right, you can change your choice.
Umm, this is your poll, sir...

Terminax

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1185
  • Never despair. Never surrender.
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #5 on: 30 May 2013, 14:29:11 »
You should be able to change your vote. There's a little box when you make/change a poll that allows people to change their vote.

Orion

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 599
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #6 on: 30 May 2013, 14:37:21 »
I have almost no interest in the clans, so anything after them is of secondary interest.  While I could be happy doing Operation Guerrero in 3057 or something similar, clan tech and clan warriors always seem to creep in, and I don't want that.  And when you get right done to it, I find the intro tech to be much more fun than all the new toys that came around post clans.

On the scale issue, I much prefer small units when I play.  Let me be the leader of a struggling merc unit than never gets above a company in size.  I want to care about all the unit members, not just a couple key officers.  The campaign style I prefer (but can never find players to do) is about half lance on lance tabletop game, and half RPG action.  I enjoy reading about larger scales, but would prefer to not play it myself.  And if I ever did battalion or larger games, I'd have to use Battleforce just to ever finish the thing - I think a company on company game would have to be parsed over three or more nights, which I find unworkable.
Game mechanics are a way of resolving questions in play, not explanations of the world itself.

Klingon

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 112
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #7 on: 30 May 2013, 19:19:09 »
Orion, I have to observe that what you are looking for in an RP experience pretty much excludes the FGC. It's certainly a valid concept, but the FGC pretty much is definitively about the grand scale actions. You might consider pitching your own RP concept, see if you drum up some interest. Heck, I might play in something like that, once we get something going in the FGC, presuming that happens.

Terminax

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1185
  • Never despair. Never surrender.
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #8 on: 30 May 2013, 20:03:40 »
Out of the ten people who've voted so far, only three have chimed in. C'mon guys! SPEAK UP  8) Be heard! Please, we can't do this without your input.

I haven't voted myself, because I'm entirely flexible. I'm willing to play, GM or whatever in any of the above campaigns.

Now rules probably deserve their own thread but that can be dealt with that next week. Right now we can spout ideas.


Rules ideas:

The ATOW campaign, of course would use ATOW and the ATOW Companion but the Grand Strategy games... they'll need their own rules. I've got an old copy of the rules from the last FGC I tried involving myself in but honestly, it's one of those spreadsheet heavy things and too convoluted for me. Nothing against anybody who wants to do that kind and has the patience and technical skill to manage it but I don't. I also don't think one of my old rulesets I used for the Frontier's Shattered Sphere games would appeal to anybody here (it has a few fans but I'm not one of them) and it was allot of math. So if anyone's got any ideas lets hear them.

For combat resolution, I've become fond of an adaptation of Tomorrow's War (a futuristic generic miniatures game) rules. They use a fixed target number of 4, and change the number and size of the dice depending on the situation and use a firepower vs defense opposed check. So that'd allow for the two gradiants Battletech runs around - experience and technology and if you worked it right you could take account for the differences between mechs and other units, as well as weight classes and I've got some thoughts on unit size too boot. In my mind's eye, I see two kinds of record sheets for units - a short one (so we could fit two on a normal 8 1/2 by 11 paper) and a long version (takes up the whole page) that could contain the records for a complete command from up to an RCT/Division in strength. For a large scale GS game, even this much might be too much. So it'd look and feel something like Battletech we've all come to love even if it plays differently. As for units to be tracked, we focus on the named forces.

Economy wise, I would like to keep it simple enough that either a simple spreadsheet (and not a monster one) can handle it or even better, it can be worked out by hand. I'm thinking of a two point system. One, would represent your general economy and you spend it like cash to buy things from military units, transportation ability, industrial infrastructure and technology. This amount could be based on a number of things but we can work that out later. The second would be an action point setup that you spend when you conduct certain activities like launching attacks, invasions and other such things. Each action would have a cost attached to it and you can only spend what you have. You'd get a base number of action points every year for participating in the game and doing your budget (the stick) and more for writing posts (the carrot) so if you're getting back what you put into the game.

As to technology, that's another sticky part. Some people like detailed, some people don't. My take is not to overly concentrate on it - maybe work out something like general scaling up - the Inner Sphere and Clans both have about three distinct generations of technological increases above their base level of technology. But there are somethings that are both technological and infrastructure in basis - like dropships, jumpships and warships that should be covered seperately.

ATOW campaign ideas:

I'm running a ATOW campaign in the real world of with 7 to 11 players (depends on what we're doing) set after an alternative WoR where Clan Blood Spirits leave the Home Worlds one step ahead of the other Clans while heading towards a promised new start in the deep periphery, Battlestar Galactica style. To keep the game moving, I revolve the players every month or so/ or every half dozen sessions so from one group of PCs to another, covering various levels of the Clan from the top to the rank and file warriors and even playing as their own eventual opposition in the Coreward Confederacy/RWR Outpost 27. We could run that, or something along similar lines or something else. The usual mercenary routine is always good but I feel like something more involved than that.

Small scale GS campaign ideas:

First idea is based around the Circinus Federation to Magistracy of Canopus Periphery in the years before the Marian Hegemony eats the Lothian League and Illyrian Palatinate. Each player plays one of the periphery powers and independents or maybe a regional power or two from the FWL could also get into the act. The focus of the game is try to eat others while not being eaten at the same.

Second idea is to do the same kind of thing as above but in the Chaos March starting in the early months. The players would control the proto-states or independent worlds, maybe even mercenaries trying to get into the action. In addition to their own antics, they'd have to deal with the outside influences of the various houses as they try to bring the factions into their camps.

Third idea, Clan home world based game. Either before the invasion or after (Wars of Reaving perhaps???)

Large Scale GS campaign ideas: (deliberately not fleshed out atm)

The Succession Wars Game of Thrones edition: The five great houses and their various going ons. Just skip the explicit sex scenes because this is a family friendly site. This game could work with a dozen players but more can be accommodated.

The whole kit and caboodle - The Inner Sphere, the Clans and the Periphery in all their glory. The grand campaign from the start of the Clan Invasion, After Tukayyid, F-C Civil War or wherever. This one would be the beast of beasts and requires at least a score of players to do properly.

Fatebringer

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3401
  • 138th Mechanized Infantry The Chicago Division
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #9 on: 31 May 2013, 09:02:14 »
Quote
Out of the ten people who've voted so far, only three have chimed in. C'mon guys! SPEAK UP  8) Be heard! Please, we can't do this without your input.

Only two of the options asked for explanations :P

My choice was based on my desire to keep playing my chosen faction and the only ways to do that are pre-invasion clan game or post invasion IS / Clan Game set past the 4th SW.

Star Captain Jared Siegel ~ Clan Snow Raven Forum
"If every mech was built like in MWO, we'd all be carrying ammo in our feet..."

Terminax

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1185
  • Never despair. Never surrender.
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #10 on: 31 May 2013, 09:14:25 »
And in the first post, I told people to open up :) [whipit]

What's your chosen faction Fatebringer?


guardiandashi

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4826
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #11 on: 31 May 2013, 09:30:39 »
as a capsule overview my idea of a fun game at a strategic level (running a house) is:

you get an income, weather you call it cbills, millions of cbills resource points whatever isn't critical.
you have an "upkeep" expense this should be based at least in part on the infrastructure you have, and also the military you have built.  (it should be possible to mothball equipment to save on upkeep costs and to serve as a "reserve" )

you have various "production" limits  examples that come to mind for me are:
population, education, etc these are of course the "human resources needed to do things"

manufacturing production this is used to build things, and should be a balancing act, do you spend several turns expanding your factories etc to get to where you can build more combat units, ot do you just churn out units  using your current production capacity.

economic production this is more "iffy" I consider this part of the "civilian" production note you can "take over" this capacity for more military production but there would be consequences for doing so, additionally if you "encourage and help this"  you should end up with more cash to buy stuff.

research and development this is where you develop those upgraded and "advanced tech" things I would like to see a fully fleshed out set of rules for both this and the "Manufacturing production/economic production" "minigames" but this may not be the best place for that, but a simplified form would make sense (to me)

after that you start getting into the "core of the house tech /grand council" game IE running a "insert political unit"

you issue orders that will try to be followed in peacetime there may be a different turn time than during combat, IE do you issue orders annually 2x/year every 3 months every month etc and how long does it take for those orders to go into effect / change
during wartimes I would kind of expect orders to be more frequent (in game) but some things don't respond to change at the same rates eg production orders are still for a year, but you can start picking up the completed units each month instead of 1x /year (for example)

you build units (which have a personnel and hardware cost) 't have the people there is no way you can "stand up another regiment" but conversely if you don't have the hardware to equip that assault regiment nothing is going to help.....

Minerva

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 212
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #12 on: 31 May 2013, 13:35:53 »
In my view the FGC should be all about being a feudal lord.

Each lord is depicted with set of attributes called Leadership Points and each action costs a set amount of leadership points. Points can be stored to depict attempts to achieve major activities. This mechanism hinders ability of large realm to overrun others as they cannot do everything at once. Second, the realm collects taxes as form of Resources Points. They come from owned systems. They are consumed to maintenance of assets, pay to relatives/magnates and various actions.

Each Resource is owned by NPC Magnate who has opinion of the ruler. Various ruler's actions change opinions or targets of actions and/or everyone in realm or everyone in Inner Sphere. For example military victories increases opinion while things like questioning moral authority of Comstar, marrying a foreign princess or tyrannically imprisoning your sister are generally disapproved.

Opinions are simple +/- factors (to keep things simple) and when they fall low enough the Magnate either starts a lot or joins to some existing one. Plots aim to do different things (but generally to curb Lord's power) so lord must either destroy plotters, give in before plot goes into motion or discredit some/all of the plotters. Simply standing alive long enough means that plot will eventually sputter. Most dangerous plot happens when player manages to get one of her NPC Relatives so angry that she becomes a Pretender.

NPC relatives are assets that can be used to extend ruler's actions. Relative used this way gains fame that can make her possible pretender if her prestige overshadows ruler.

Wolflord

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3621
  • Look Ma! I have enough posts for a time jump!
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #13 on: 31 May 2013, 14:13:01 »
I picked large scale grand strategy pre clan because I'm currently running a large scale grand post clan invasion campaign.

Warclaw

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 223
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #14 on: 31 May 2013, 15:06:10 »
my preference would be a small scale RPG, set in the pre-clans era to start...say about 3040.

The reasons for this are several.

1) starts fairly simple/small scale, allowing everyone to be able to keep track of things, and with a fairly low learning curve for people unfamiliar with the era.

2) Allows for addition of Clan tech later on in the game, if things develop in that direction

3) era allows a wide range for possible RP scenarios

4) Allows for later expansion, and can be shifted to small/large scale grand strategy if desired.  (PC's become nobles/high command officers)

Arkansas Warrior

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9203
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #15 on: 31 May 2013, 15:44:20 »
I voted Large Scale After Clan, but I'd be interested in and non-AToW campaign.  Maybe even an AToW campaign, but I've never done AToW before, and I'd rather stick with what I'm vaguely familiar with.
Sunrise is Coming.

All Hail First Prince Melissa Davion, the Patron Saint of the Regimental Combat Team, who cowed Dainmar Liao, created the Model Army, and rescued Robinson!  May her light ever guide the sons of the Suns, May our daughters ever endeavour to emulate her!

Terminax

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1185
  • Never despair. Never surrender.
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #16 on: 01 June 2013, 15:03:43 »
Aside from rules and setting, we've also got to designate some GMs. Here's my preferred setup for a Grand Strategy game:

Head GM
GM #1
GM #2
GM Troubleshooter

The Head GM is the guy in charge of the game. That means he's in charge of setting it up, giving it a direction and running it once it has both of those. Usually he will also handle the back end of the game, keeping track of the numbers. GM #1 and GM #2 are the main guys that help the Head GM do his job, with GM #1 being the guy who'll run the game when the Head GM is unavailable and GM #2 being GM #1 backup man. Ideally GM #1 and GM #2 will over see a particular aspect of the game but that depends on the campaign setting of course. The GM Troubleshooter gets no specific appointments, instead acts as the guy who deals with the small stuff so the Head GM can focus on the big picture and GM #1 and GM #2 can focus on their aspects of the game.

Four GM should be more than enough to handle a game between ten to twenty five people. Less than ten people, we can easily drop the GM #2 position. More than twenty five people, we can talk about adding extra GMs if/when it happens. Now, I'm naturally willing to run my own game or troubleshoot for somebody else's but I know that I'm not good as a fall back guy.

If we're talking about me running a game, I need a guy who good with a spreadsheet and I need a guy who is good at writing under time constraints and a guy who can do both. Knowledge of the Universe is a must and access to the books is extremely helpful. If someone is artistic and can do simple graphics and/or setup a layout template like a record sheet I could use their help too but it isn't necessary for being a GM if you'd rather play. I can work out rules, I need someone to write them up in a fashion that other people can understand but also isn't necessary for being a GM if you'd rather play. I use Office 2007, Open Office, Libre Office and have a Dropbox account we can use to host game files.

We'll need a way to communicate and possibly teleconference so I'll ask that we use Skype (my account name is lordterminax) as it's free and relatively easy to use. If you want to GM in a game I'll run, hit me up on Skype (preferably) or PM me.



Arkansas Warrior - ATOW isn't difficult mechanically, and we'd focus on the role playing if we go that route, most of the mechanics would be on the GM side of things. The worst part is getting through the extended character creation process.

Warclaw - It's my experience games don't translate from small scale to large scale successfully. It's preferable to stick to one rule set throughout the game.

Wolflord - What rules are you using for your game?

Minerva - A different way of doing things than I would do it, not that it's wrong but I definitely do not view the universe the same way you do.

guardiandashi - We're not far apart on what we'd want out of a game except on the technology part. I think that the vast majority of tech advancements are for getting faster, stronger, tougher war machines and do not scale terribly well on a strategic scale. Having an exhaustive list of technological upgrades is something we'd have to track for every player and I don't think that level of granularity works. Just tracking units in a way that doesn't reduce conflict to risk is allot to keep track of.



 Any thoughts on the campaign ideas presented in my previous long post?

guardiandashi

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4826
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #17 on: 01 June 2013, 16:57:14 »
I will toss out that I would like to have solid rules for tech upgrades, even if they aren't effectively used.

IE a "modular campaign framework"

examples of what I would like:

game overview

module 1, production
rules for what you normally get for unit production out of random factory xxyz
this includes both ~production rates (modifiable for an individual game)
typical product production limitations, ~production rates for a basic factory, bonus to production for having multiple "lines" producing the same unit etc

module 2  logistics
rules for keeping units supplied, bonus for "well supplied" penalties for supply shortages etc

module 3 transportation
moving stuff around (nuff said)

module 4 infrastructure (upgrades, and maintenance especially.) 

module 5 political and "dirty tricks" if bob is working on getting a new factory up and running do I send in my spies or agents to disrupt this?

I would like a R&D module but I can see where it would not be well suited for "every game" but having the option would be nice even if it gets "summarized as bonuses to (insert effect)"

Wolflord

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3621
  • Look Ma! I have enough posts for a time jump!
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #18 on: 01 June 2013, 17:08:05 »
Started with mechwarrior 2nd ed for the RPG aspects, brought in some shadowrun 2nd ed for a bit more detail in RPG (cue hiatus while we figured that out) and then ported the whole lot over to ATOW (cue another hiatus while we figured out character conversions and double checked where we'd got to).

Started with BMR for mech combat and relatively large combats, quickly realised we'd need to proxy the less critical engagements. e.g. a Timber Wolf A proxies a star in a key storyline battle but proxies a cluster in a "sideshow" battle (going from one extreme to the other) Zeus proxies a Lyran battalion and so on.

Trenacker

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #19 on: 01 June 2013, 18:39:36 »
I'm interested in the simultation-style games, large and small. I'd prefer something in the Periphery.

Nibs

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1790
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #20 on: 01 June 2013, 20:31:10 »
I am happy with multiple options, with one caveat: I am unfamiliar with A Time of War and have no resources in that area. I am not sure in what capacity it would work, but keep in mind that it would need to be accessible to everyone.

Diamondshark

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1292
  • Bringing back the enlightenment to the Star League
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #21 on: 01 June 2013, 22:12:00 »
I would want to be:
1) Alexandr Kerensky organizing the response to the Amaris Coup.

or

2) Anastasius Focht in his command center thing during Tukayyid that the Blood of Kerensky books describe.
"We are the Clans, the Star League incarnate.
None can stand against us and survive."

-- The Remembrance, Passage 272, Verse 8, Lines 18-19

Terminax

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1185
  • Never despair. Never surrender.
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #22 on: 01 June 2013, 22:40:12 »
I would want to be:
1) Alexandr Kerensky organizing the response to the Amaris Coup.

or

2) Anastasius Focht in his command center thing during Tukayyid that the Blood of Kerensky books describe.

That's the kind of wish listing that gets people killed in "accidents" to save GMs from the madness.

Klingon

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 112
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #23 on: 01 June 2013, 23:34:00 »
Started with mechwarrior 2nd ed for the RPG aspects, brought in some shadowrun 2nd ed for a bit more detail in RPG (cue hiatus while we figured that out) and then ported the whole lot over to ATOW (cue another hiatus while we figured out character conversions and double checked where we'd got to).

Started with BMR for mech combat and relatively large combats, quickly realised we'd need to proxy the less critical engagements. e.g. a Timber Wolf A proxies a star in a key storyline battle but proxies a cluster in a "sideshow" battle (going from one extreme to the other) Zeus proxies a Lyran battalion and so on.
The proxying we used had Force Points, if the CC had 5 FPs in an invasion and were dropping on a FS world that had 12 FPs defending it (oopsie!) the defender made their force, announced their BV to the GMs, the attacker got notified what BV he had to work with, he picked his force out, then they gamed it out in MM. Sometimes there was an upset, most often the underdog managed to inflict more serious losses than they took (enforcing a Pyrrhic victory), but it was almost always interesting. Not saying that's necessarily a correct way, but it was a way it was done, and everyone seemed to think it was pretty fair. Basically we had to figure out relative strengths in terms of FPs, I think that may have come from ISIF.

Terminax

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1185
  • Never despair. Never surrender.
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #24 on: 02 June 2013, 20:36:55 »
Alright, I have a fair amount of rule ideas to show but I'm still muddling through a graphic illustration so you guys understand what I'm talking about and between home responsibilities and work, I won't get it done until at least tomorrow, probably Tuesday. In the meantime I'd really like to hear more back from you guys about the various campaign ideas I presented in an earlier post.



Wolflord/Klingon - Alright, I get what you did. Yeah, it sounds rooted in ISIF.

Guardiandashi - It's only modular if each segment of the rules uses the same kind of basic underpinnings but I digress.

Things I expect to have to track in my game:

Some sort of system for buying things with. Things to buy: Military units, Infrastructure, Resources and Technology. Technology is definitely going to be mostly handled with a broad stroke.

Some sort of system for transportation.

Some sort of system for Military Units.

Some sort of Diplomacy/Intelligence system. I expect it to look very similar to the system used in Space Empires III, a classic 4X game because that's exactly where I'm lifting it from.

That's it. And even then, that's allot of stuff to track. If the information is organized the right way and the system kept simple, the vast amount of information becomes manageable.

Nibs

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1790
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #25 on: 02 June 2013, 22:32:21 »
In the meantime I'd really like to hear more back from you guys about the various campaign ideas I presented in an earlier post.

We should really take three or four specific campaign ideas and put them to a vote. There is a lot of difference of opinion and many ideas, so eventually someone needs to take control and make a decision.

By the way; thanks for the initial efforts!

Terminax

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1185
  • Never despair. Never surrender.
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #26 on: 03 June 2013, 18:36:50 »
Nibs - Thanks. I'm trying to take control but it's like herding cats.



I'd rather have discussion and dialogue here before doing yet another poll. At some point we're going to have to roll up our sleeves and actually do work to get a game going and that requires people to speak up. I'm not surprised at all that Worktroll's comments haven't made much of impression except on the guys who are trying to work something out. To date, despite two requests over the course of the past few days  there hasn't been on any comment on anything I've actually written about in this thread. If anything I've said doesn't appeal to someone, just say so and save me the effort of digging a deeper hole for myself. If something does appeal to someone, tell me so I know. But at least respond!

In any case I'm about three quarters done with a prototype unit sheet, and after that I'll pick out a trio of commands from the books - an Inner Sphere, a Clan and something random and make them up. It'll be the rough not final version of course but I hope it'll illustrate what I'm thinking here.

Korsar

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 60
  • Meet Demi-Precentor Kingslay
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #27 on: 05 June 2013, 03:08:10 »
Actually, I checked the wrong box... I'm interested in more then one of the above!

As playing/GMing ATOW has been quite difficult due to my players living a hour away and me not having a car I would very much like an PBP-Game. Here, my preferred Timeline would be Post-Clan, as I quite like the modern developments. (Even better would be DA, so I can play that Character idea I've had in the back of my head for quite some time now  ;D).

On the other hand I would gladly join a game with a much bigger focus. Point is, I'm more inclined to play smallish characters, so I would likely join with someone together.

Apart from that... Consider me hooked  ;)

3067: Demi-Precentor Jack "Korsar" Kingslay, 22nd Propaganda Detachment, WoB

Terminax

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1185
  • Never despair. Never surrender.
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #28 on: 10 June 2013, 11:54:22 »
A week has passed and still no comment. ???

Do you guys actually want a game? Because I don't intend to post anymore work until I get some feedback on what I've already written.

Klingon

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 112
Re: Poll #1 - Choices, Choices Part One
« Reply #29 on: 10 June 2013, 12:32:03 »
I think everything that can usefuly be said has been said. There simply will not be a consensus on this. If you're willing to GM a game, decide what you want to do, lay out your terms, what's negotiable and not, and pick your co-GMs from the volunteers, and see who joins.

tl;dr version: You got a game you want to run? Run with it, man!