No.412471
The setting, the story, the goals and the challenges are always the easy part for me. I tend to design campaigns that are very "sandbox" in nature, with some basic ideas, a few specific challenges I'd like to give the players and a general progression of the world events as the campaign goes along. The only thing I always struggle with is making good combat scenarios.
So here I am, day dreaming at work, and the idea occurs to me that maybe I can use irl military training concepts as a basis for my combat scenarios (current and historical).
Anyone try this before? Any good resources out there for this stuff? I'm talking about community stuff that adapts these to tabletop or old manuals from history that lay out these basic concepts for drill instructors to train their troops. Any good books that detail the tactics used by squads in history?
>2nd Pic related, maps and details to get the imagination going.
This will be an Only War campaign, which is why I'm looking at more modern battles and tactics, but I'm also interested in historical, more traditional small unit tactics for the next Fantasy campaign I run.
I'm more interested in small skirmish type stuff you'd see in your typical group campaign, but large scale battle ideas are also important for communicating scale and scope in a story.
____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.412476
>irl military training concepts
It's not much different from "gaming" in that your party has a general idea of what to do when faced with certain opposition. It's when the formula meets the organic nature of fighting that gets things going in a more interesting direction, like a half-assed and violent game of rock-paper-scissors until someone slips up.
While this is usually based on either rulesets or just player initiative, you can definitely push the incentive to pre-plan or inspire tactics by having a much more organized enemy that uses small unit tactics(suppressing fire that's a deliberate string of misses but in such a volume that scares the shit out of them, grenades off to the side of their cover, hearing them yelling orders) and shows they mean business.
Most tactics are somewhat common knowledge already, it's just how they're used that's special. I know it tests sanity, but glance through /k/ and look up videos on the topic. Use them as inspiration while considering the scope of a confrontation and possible variables that can be involved.
Because you're the DM you can definitely slap on some homebrewed ideas or just take liberties with it, but as with all things it's heavily reliant on the players.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.412648
>>412471
>Any good resources out there for this stuff?
You mean stuff like this? I know for certain you'll need at least a grid if you're going to use more real engagements cause otherwise distance is only relative to whoever vaguely remembers where they are supposed to be.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.412982
>>412648
Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. Mostly just looking for stuff that might show historical battles/skirmishes, or manuals that might reference classical battle scenarios. Like I said, the idea I have is to take real world scenarios/situations and then use them in my campaigns in the way someone might use a pre-made dungeon/plot.
I use a grid mat for battles. Narrating the battles are superior imo, but I'm just not good enough to do it without a visual/physical guide just yet.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413177
Not quite what you were looking for in that there's nothing about training regemins or anything, but as far as battles go
http://www.theartofbattle.com/
For actual Boot Camp shit I don't see the IG being much different than Full Metal Jacket. (Remember R. Lee Ermy was a Gunnery Srgt in the Marine Corp, served in Vietnam and ad libed almost all his training dialogue)
For small unit tactics... I hate to say this due to how cucked so much of that site is but Wikipedia's section here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_tactics is good enough for gaming purposes.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413289
Any anons know good games/systems to do covert ops type games? Shadowrun, maybe?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413443
Borderline non-sequitur, but my favorite fights in tabletop (D&D/Pathfinder in specific) have always been the ones with interesting or demanding geographic complications. So much tabletop combat happens in a pre-cleared field with maybe one or two things dropped in, like a tree. Or a "dungeon", which is just a series of clearings with traps between them sometimes. It's boring to tears.
My favorite combats to date have been:
1) Being engaged from across a valley with my and the enemy party on opposing mountain ridges, turning the fight into a cover-and-suppression war with arrows being used at multiple range increments out to pin down targets long enough for the Wizards to mortar the enemy position with Fireballs.
2) A ship-to-ship naval engagement where the DM actually had the ships maneuvering and acting like vessels captained by people that wanted to both win and stay alive, as opposed to parking next to eachother to trade broadsides while we boarded or were boarded.
3) An Ithilid-built flying dreadnought we had to harry and weaken with guerrilla tactics and misdirection until we could breach its hull and take out the crew because the dreadnought itself was so high above our CR that the implied fail state of the fight was being in the square acre it targeted with its primary weapon.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413593
The ways you can bring actual military tactics into the game depend on what your players represent - are they spec ops, or line infantry, or recon, or even medieval cavalry - and how game they are when it comes to likely losing some speed and abstraction to hew that bit closer to reality.
These are from GURPS Tactical Shooting, for example. Obviously, they're stated in GURPS terms, but the cores of the manoeuvres are system-agnostic.
As for fantasy tactics, it obviously depends what time period you're going for, and what equipment they have available. If they're in a feudalistic society where the nobles have a long horse-riding tradition, for example, they might turn out something like 12thC Norman tactics - heavy cavalry charges at weak points, guarded by a screening line of levies and cheap mercenaries in place to provide cover for the cavalry as they regroup. That kind of repeats itself until one line breaks, at which point all bets are off and the victors cut down the routing peasants to ensure there's no regroup. That sets up a lot of potential combat situations - if the PCs are line infantry, and their line breaks down, you could justify pretty much anything coming at them and force them into a fighting retreat or a death-or-glory push while beset by opportunistic enemies from all sides. Even once they get out of the battle, very few people are going to want to harbour soldiers from the losing side, who often turn to banditry and rape and pillage their way home.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413603
A few years back I did a game based on Only War in one of the more trashy variant-/tg/ questthread settings. Getting ahold of US field manuals when I had absolutely zero experience with the tactics of combat helped immensely. Theres a lot of useful information and considerations in there, but it is fairly hefty reading and a little bit outdated, but it was invaluable when planning an assault on an occupied town with breach-and-clear tactics and mechanised support.
I also wasn't aware 10' poles were standard infantry equipment either, but there you go.
https://anonfile.com/482fJfSbmd/attp3_06x11_pdf
https://anonfile.com/2229JaScm4/fm_3-06.11_combined_arms_operations_in_urban_terrain_pdf
https://anonfile.com/sf22JcS2m7/fm3_21x91_pdf
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413641
>>413603
Now I know why my Pathfinder players insist on carrying a ten-foot pole everywhere. They even have a collapsible one that breaks down into 10 foot-long pieces.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413642
>>413603
Or should I say 10 1-foot long pieces.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413689
>>413443
>A ship-to-ship naval engagement where the DM actually had the ships maneuvering and acting like vessels captained by people that wanted to both win and stay alive,
That thing has been bothering me for years. How the fuck do you run a game with wanting to stay alive as a given? I mean, a GM can play his mooks like that, because for him, winning is not the main goal. But for players, it is. No matter how much they love their characters, at the end of the day, they will risk everything with them again and again. The players are too powerful, just for the sheer disposeability of their characters. Even if you make players weaker/enemies stronger, it's still a thing they will do.
Do you just make the players weaker, and play your monsters more carefully and realistically? Then the players are always at your mercy, and it's not really a challenge, just a test of how far the GM is willing to go. It'd be weird if an injured ogre was running away from a party of goblin players who pull crazy stunts, because they just flat out do not care if they live or die.
I mean, you could attach the players to their characters, but even then they tend to be unrealistic risk-takers. Introduce a mechanic where player characters can falter and refuse a command because of a failed check? Then that is taking away from the player control, and players hate that.
The only real solution I see is having a good party of players and a good GM. But if that was the case always, then we would be living in a Utopia.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413701
>>413689
Let them develop their pawns themselves, they'll grow attached enough that they will at least not be entirely suicidal.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413750
>>413689
I think it depends on your group. I've only ever had the opposite problem, with players turning away from what I would call reasonable challenges because they thought it was too risky. The only way I could deal with it was, effectively, pointing them at the problem and saying 'plot this way', which doesn't fly with a lot of people.
It only gets worse in horror campaigns, when the enemy is very obviously a large threat. The party needs to be in sync with what the GM wants to do, or it becomes too adversarial to keep going.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413787
>>412471
>So here I am, day dreaming at work, and the idea occurs to me that maybe I can use irl military training concepts as a basis for my combat scenarios (current and historical).
How...?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413798
>>413787
*To elaborate, it baffles me that this is a new idea for you.
Anyway, I've got a low-fantasy idea that I'm trying to work out. Basically, although it's set in the 21st century, the style of warfare is an evolved form of pike-and-shot warfare, and everyone mostly wears the same clothing of the period, with minor changes. There are computers and electricity, but the computers are older; I'm not even sure I want them to have screens. The only ways of flying are by gliding (which isn't really flying) or hot-air balloons. I'm not sure I want steam power as well, but anyway, and I'm not sure about the geopolitical landscape and politics of major powers, though I know for sure I want Sweden to have won the Great Northern War. But my relevant (to the thread topic) issue is—why did tech evolve in the West when it did not in Japan; why did the Japanese not try to develop better firearms on their own? Supposedly, some Japanese claim that it's because the matchlock is better for aiming than the flintlock (obviously, all smoothbore) or other firing mechanisms before the US forced contact with the Japanese in the mid-1800s and introduced better weapons of the period. But I don't believe that. On the other hand, it's possible that there wasn't much of a reason to, because by the time the flintlock's heyday rolled around, Japan was at relative peace and had instituted its Sakoku policy already (I have not heard this explanation and came up with it on the spot, and quite frankly, it makes a hell of a lot more sense than a claim of accuracy). So now I have to come up with a good reason as to why pike-and-shot would still be around. I thought that maybe there wasn't ever a Reformation, but I still need an Anglican Church.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413829
>>413798
The Sakoku policy leading to the stagnation of firearms development is pretty well-established, I think. It's the first explanation given on the Wikipedia page, anyway.
I mean, it makes sense. The Japanese hadn't developed a culture of civilian firearms use like the British and the Americans had by then, so there wasn't much need for innovation on that front, and owning a few muskets wouldn't be a huge advantage for a criminal or rebel organisation because they're only worth a damn in massed formation.
As for why pike and shot would be the strategy of the times, maybe look at why pikes dropped off the field, I.e. the bayonet. With the ever-increasing accuracy and power of firearms, cavalry became less of a threat, so armies no longer needed the massive pikes to keep horses at bay. Just fixing a sword to the end of the gun became quite sufficient to defend against (and make) charges. To keep pike and shot on the field, you'd need ways to hold back that progress. Maybe body armour developed more quickly, so it's less certain that a musket barrage will bring down a cavalry charge. That would require either a surprising leap in armour development - 18thC Kevlar and trauma plates - or much, much stronger horses (and men) to encase people in thick enough steel to reliably bounce musket fire.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413832
>>413798
>why did tech evolve in the West when it did not in Japan; why did the Japanese not try to develop better firearms on their own?
Because while the Japanese are highly intelligent, they are not particularly creative, any more than any other non-European race. Almost all human inventions are from ethnic Europeans; the few exceptions are so rare as to basically be a statistical error, and usually come across by accident (ie, Chinese invention of gunpowder). The Japanese are good at refining things that are already invented, and producing high quality products. But they innovate very little. Significant advancements in firearms were not in making the same gun but better (which is the Japanese approach) but in making altogether new kinds of guns, such as different firing mechanisms, breach loading instead of muzzle loading, rifled barrels, bolt action, etc.
So an invention would happen in Europe or the Anglosphere, and eventually make its way to Japan where it would generally be adopted and refined. Firearms are no exception.
I do agree with >>413829's assessment on bayonets making the pike irrelevant, though. As far as solutions go, one option you could always go with is instead of setting it in an alternate history earth, you set it in a fictional world that's inspired by the period you want to set it in. This gives you more freedom in terms of dictating technological progression; you can make armour stay around longer, for example, by deciding that your setting has a much greater amount of coal and iron deposits available and steel is consequently much cheaper to make.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413845
>decide to employ some proper tactics for enemies for my game
>estabilish chain of command, prepare strategic chokepoints, tactically place enemy squads in places with good cover, exploit the light/dark mechanics for an advantage, prepare the best suited terrain for the defenders
>game finally starts, party finally enters
>giddy as fuck about how it's going to go down, spent loads of time trying to get the balance just right
<"Dude, charge, lmao!"
>total party kill in the very first encounter
I'll just place an ogre in the middle of an empty room next time or something, my players are too retarded to fight an intelligent enemy.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413848
>>412982
Well for mass battle I might need some time to dig /k/ stuff up, for tactics use this http://ttp3.dslyecxi.com/ a beginners guide for ARMA 3 gameplay. Seems weird at first but explains things that is applicable for tactical skirmishes you can roughly translate to the tabletop both on a grid with some elevation props and explaining it to your audience. i.e. they were spotted on the hill cause their silhouette stuck out like a sore thumb, you could even show them a picture of silhouettes standing on a hill. Beyond that stealing FEAR1's map layouts and converting them to a grid would do wonders because the maps are circular the group would have to use teamwork or else get flanked.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413865
>>413845
GM tip: never be clever. Clever is for the players to be on occasion, and only if they want to be.
Firstly, it's cheating. The GM gets as much time as he wants to set up the game and get encyclopaedic knowledge of the players and their opposition before the game begins, while the players get a few hours, most of which will be spent having fun, or otherwise gaining imperfect knowledge of the opposition. If they can come up with a good strategy in that time, good on them, reward them for it - don't make that a requirement to play the game unless everyone involved wants to play that way.
Secondly, it's a waste of time and effort, because the players have no way of knowing how clever you're being. For all the players know, those masterfully placed and prepared reinforcements, a vital part of any co-ordinated defence, have just popped out of thin air because you thought they were having it too easy. That sniper could always have been there and they just missed a perception roll, or maybe he just phased in because fuck them, you've been having a bad day.
Fundamentally, the problem is that you didn't want to run the kind of game that they wanted to play. So why on earth were you GMing for them?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413868
>>413865
>being smart is cheating
What a whole lot of words, only to wind up saying nothing valuable. Why not tell him to fudge dice when things aren't going his way, too?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413871
>>413868
More like using viable tactical moves without forewarning looks like cheating. It can, so you will have to balance sense carefully. At the minimum a dice roll out of the blue will clue them in.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413872
>>413868
You're not being "smart" if you are trying to win, you are being confused. Trying to win is not the job of the GM.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413897
>>413872
If they die, they die. They'll learn from their mistakes when they reroll their characters.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413928
>>413829
>As for why pike and shot would be the strategy of the times, maybe look at why pikes dropped off the field
Not what I was asking, though I don't blame you for misunderstanding, because I sort of just shat out that post really quick. I know why it evolved, the problem I have is, why wouldn't they improve upon the matchlock design, or retrofit it with a knife at the end, given its lengthy pole shape? For example, for the most part, the main way the Romans fought remained relatively unchanged for three to four-hundred years, since the abandonment of the phalanx for the speed and flexibility of the maniple and later cohort, and until the Late-Imperial reforms. I think I might have to come up with some new technologies to fix it. I just wish I knew where better, easier, more-detailed sources were, so I could find specifics to replace or add. I'm just a bit lazy is all.
Pic semi-related, just thought it looked cool.
>>413832
>whites are elves meme
Yeah yeah yeah, I've heard the same theory on /pol/ before. Not everything is about race, nu/pol/ack. While it plays a factor into things, as all things do, it is not the ultimate factor.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413930
>>413928
Leaving aside the absurdity of saying "whites are elves meme" when elves typically don't invent things and are stagnant (if there are inventors in a fantasy setting they'll usually be humans, dwarves, or gnomes if present) if race is "just a spook" and other races would only have invented stuff if "da wite man din keep 'em down" or "muh environment" or whatever drivel you think is the main reason other races do not invent things, don't you think the distribution would be something other than "99.999% European, virtually nothing everyone else"? If it was something like "80% of inventions from Europeans, 20% from non-Europeans" then you could make a case for it being something more than genetic, like maybe Europeans had a more favourable sociopolitical climate for inventions. But there is no argument that explains a virtually total monopoly on invention, besides that non-European races simply do not possess that aspect of creativity in the first place.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413931
>>413928
Take a look at this link:
http://history.emory.edu/home/documents/endeavors/volume5/gunpowder-age-v-astroth.pdf
Take it with a pinch of salt, because the original author the article is discussing was highly politically motivated and was calling for tighter gun laws in the US to put the genie back in the bottle, but the fact that the government had a monopoly on guns is a very good reason why they never got any actual development.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.413932
>>413931
Wow, completely new to me. Thanks, I don't deserve to be spoonfed like this.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.414005
>>413928
>Not everything is about race, nu/pol/ack.
Don't be that guy Anon. You even opened your response with a greentext that, within context, doesn't make any sense. Elves? He doesn't even mention Elves.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.414580
>>413865
No. How you DM is up to you. And it's up to the players you invite to decide if they like the way you run a campaign.
This whole "the players matter more than you" shit is fucking retarded.
As the DM, I don't "owe" the players anything.
Now, if you want to be normal human beings and actually discuss your preferences as a group and try to come to a general understanding of expectations and preferred ways to play, then that's fine, but once the campaign starts, I'm not going to sand bag and hand hold players who keep coming back for more, and I'm not going to regret the players who don't enjoy how I run my campaigns and leave.
I personally make it clear to my players that I'm not their enemy, that I want them to experience the campaign and enjoy themselves, that I'll never purposefully kill them and that I'll never force them into a no win situation. But, I'll also be clear that if they are rolling a dice and making decisions, that they have a chance of death and that I won't sandbag for them. It's up to them to beat, overcome, avoid or circumvent the challenges and enemies they face.
They can take it or leave it.
And you know what? Every single person I've introduced to the hobby has learned to appreciate the challenge and "hardcore" nature of my campaigns. With many coming back to report how lame some other easy mode campaign was, and that they preferred the way I ran mine.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.414630
>>413865
Spoiler alert: If the GM isn't enjoying running the game they want to, then the chances of that game dying rise exponentially compared to a player not enjoying the same game.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.415420
>>412648
Anyone know a source or book reference?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.415543
>>415420
Since it's just random stuff from /k/ I do not know where to dig for it outside a /k/ archive.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.415544
>>413865
This is bad reddit tier advice
>don't be clever, the players will never see it, only the players get to play the way they want.
yeah dumb it down dumdum, great advice. You are clever because some people are naturally clever, something op doesn't know a lot about. Some gm's have system mastery so cleverness is how they flex and grow in said system. As for the players never seeing it? Don't care. A good gm has autistic attention to details to lots of things the players may never see. And here's the golden tip. The gm is a player too, groups are not homogenesis and yeah if there is one guy putting in more effort, more love of the game, more time and more everything basically its the gm. That's the guy who gets what he wants.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.415552
>>415544
Yikes, way to perpetuate the cult of the GM. That's so tired and old by now, you grognard. People idolize a hard job to rationalize the effort put into it.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.415557
>>415544
>Evola quote for playing based fashy make-believe with dice
Ebin, dubsman.
My post was about not playing an RPG like a wargame, because that's not what they were designed for. The GM shouldn't take pride in 'winning' combat scenarios because he cannot lose. He has unlimited resources and all the time in the world to prepare his plans, and being "clever" in the sense of making complex tactical plans to beat the players when they're not expecting anything more difficult than a retard orc rush is ultimately a waste of time that just pisses everyone off.
>As for the players never seeing it? Don't care.
Sperging out about game world details and stats that never reach the game table is fine. The issue isn't that the players won't ever see good tactical maneuvers, it's that they can't distinguish between one that was planned and one the GM just pulled out of his ass.
>The gm is a player too, groups are not homogeneous[...]. That's the guy who gets what he wants.
Absolutely, the GM should be able to run the kind of game he wants to run, and good players are willing to make compromises to how they want to play the game to better fit what the GM wants. They can't do that if they don't know what the GM wants because he's run off giggling to write up his own Tomb of Horrors when they're expecting a zero-thought kobold bash. If the guy I was replying to had given his players fair warning - "Guys, I'm going to run these bad guys like they're experienced, co-ordinated, and want to win, and you'll need to keep all your wits about you if you want to survive the dungeon" - then it's likely that the players would have taken it more carefully and no-one would have had to roll up new characters.
Admittedly, I inferred that he didn't give them a warning, because he didn't make any reference to doing so, so that's on me if he did - but even then, when they first charged in, that's when the "serious player misunderstanding" klaxon should have started going off. The correct answer to things like "I attack the gazebo" is to stop, backtrack, and figure out where the difference is between the GM's mental image and the players'. Maybe the enemies are so bewildered by the players making a suicide charge that they fall back, leaving the GM ample time to say, "guys, you're going to get killed," instead of hitting them with a TPK from the off. If they then persist in acting like retards, fine, unload on them, they earned it.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.415669
>>415543
/k/ here. Thats from a manual made guy a guy called Dyslecxi in a group called shack tactical.
I believe its this one:
>http://ttp2.dslyecxi.com/
something random by him but a really good read:
>http://dslyecxi.com/articles_wp/the-airborne-invasion-of-north-sahrani/
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.415712
>>412648
Holy hell this picture is bad and made by someone with no real knowledge of tactics or strategy.
This "Deep Battle" is just overrunning your enemies with numbers, no matter how you try to make it look.
And Blitz Krieg" was never a real tactic used by Germany, its a British Propaganda name given to Germany's unexpected and quick victories in the early stages of WW2.
Neither German tactics nor Soviets Strategy can be learned from this picture.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.415753
>>415712
Both Deep Battle and Blitzkrieg were tactics of WWI and WWII, respectively. The chart illustrates the different between them, ad does a good job at it.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.416014
>>415669
It's worth noting that he's an actual vet, too.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.416436
Doing a Winter War-ish campaign. Fins vs Russians.(30 November 1939 - 13 March 1940)
Small country defends against a bigger (but less organised) one.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.419743
Anyone got good war stories of cunning or stealth?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.419766
>>419743
>All that 3D
He got a little lazy over the years, huh?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.419770
>>419766
Ghost in the Shell means he never has to work again
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.420615
>>413177
But the entire fun is that IG ludicrously varies per regiment.
There are the Nobles, Deathworlders, Fortress-worlders, Abhumans.
And then there are, of course, the usual conscripted hive gangers.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.420616
>>419766
mixture of laziness and soul crushing after he lost much of his notes.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.425837
This Japanese military classic has some bearing on this.
I'm curious, though, the whole tradition of the RP party is taken from The Fellowship Of The Ring, is there much historical and RL precedent for these kind of mixed small units?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.425853
Robert Rogers' 28 "Rules of Ranging" probably have a lot of relevance if a party is trying to sneak through enemy territory, like the Fellowship did.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Rogers%27_28_%22Rules_of_Ranging%22
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.