Page 2 of 2

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 9:37 am
by Atomsk
I want to use IED's in a US vs Terrorist game someday, but I can't figure out a way to make them fair without the US knowing where they are ahead of time.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:58 am
by Rayhawk
US vs "terrorist?" That's not even a competition, we're ahead by thousands and thousands, while they're barely even on the scoreboard. (I assume we're keeping score by the standard method: counting the number of innocent civilians killed on a daily basis for no reason.) I'm surprised we even let them keep the "terrorist" title anymore, they just don't stack up. Terrorist-Contenders, or Terrorist-Wannabes, maybe.

In our games we always handled hidden explosives by just designating areas as minefields and making rolls whenever someone stepped in them. Like, if you walk in this area without a Scout guiding you, roll 1d10; you hit a mine after that many inches. If the number if inches you walked was fewer than that, then you're safe; if it's more than that, time to bust out the explosion damage dice.

Using that method for IEDs is trickier, but you might line a roadway with dozens of "possible" IEDs, and then roll dice each time a convoy comes near one.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 11:23 am
by Atomsk
Rayhawk wrote:US vs "terrorist?" That's not even a competition, we're ahead by thousands and thousands, while they're barely even on the scoreboard. (I assume we're keeping score by the standard method: counting the number of innocent civilians killed on a daily basis for no reason.) I'm surprised we even let them keep the "terrorist" title anymore, they just don't stack up. Terrorist-Contenders, or Terrorist-Wannabes, maybe.

In our games we always handled hidden explosives by just designating areas as minefields and making rolls whenever someone stepped in them. Like, if you walk in this area without a Scout guiding you, roll 1d10; you hit a mine after that many inches. If the number if inches you walked was fewer than that, then you're safe; if it's more than that, time to bust out the explosion damage dice.

Using that method for IEDs is trickier, but you might line a roadway with dozens of "possible" IEDs, and then roll dice each time a convoy comes near one.
Thats a good idea, maybe set up a little table for explosive power, with 1 being a dud and 6 actually detonating at full power or something.

Really, the reason I want to do a battle with terrorists has more to do with shock value than trying to play a balanced scenario. I have all these suicide bombers and guys in turbans and ninja masks, and I think it would really break the mold of fanciful Spacemen fighting skeletons that you normally see. There could be innocent bystanders everywhere, and I'm thinking the terrorists get a point for every one of them that dies, while the non-Terrorist side (Delta Force, Marines, SAS or whatever) looses a point.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 11:29 am
by *CRAZYHORSE*

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:07 pm
by Atomsk
Kind of, I haven't got as many Brikarms weapons as that guy, but thats the general idea. I'm thinking about getting some AK-47s and paiting the stock brown.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:39 pm
by *CRAZYHORSE*
Atomsk wrote:Kind of, I haven't got as many Brikarms weapons as that guy, but thats the general idea. I'm thinking about getting some AK-47s and paiting the stock brown.
That guy is me and if you are getting brick arms for your terrorists I would recommend indeed the AK-47s and also some potatomashers (stick grenade), some RPGs, UZIs, Mauser pistols and some shotguns. these are all the weapons that look good on terrorists.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:46 pm
by Atomsk
I'm not a huge fan of the Brickarms RPG, I prefer to make my own with detachable rockets. I have a pair of silver Uzi's that Will sent free, but mostly I'm using brown muskets for now.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:03 pm
by *CRAZYHORSE*
Atomsk wrote:I'm not a huge fan of the Brickarms RPG, I prefer to make my own with detachable rockets. I have a pair of silver Uzi's that Will sent free, but mostly I'm using brown muskets for now.
have you ever had a BR RPG because they aren't that bad! but that's your opinion. and cool silver uzis

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:47 pm
by Rayhawk
Atomsk wrote:I think it would really break the mold of fanciful Spacemen fighting skeletons that you normally see. There could be innocent bystanders everywhere, and I'm thinking the terrorists get a point for every one of them that dies, while the non-Terrorist side (Delta Force, Marines, SAS or whatever) looses a point.
I think NELUG did this at one point, in one of their big modern-city games. It was superheroes vs. supervillains, or anime mecha vs. terrorists vs. police, or something like that. Innocent bystanders were used to keep score.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 7:12 pm
by piltogg
just use the kamakasi rules from 2001

Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:26 pm
by Korwinblue
Rayhawk wrote:US vs "terrorist?" That's not even a competition, we're ahead by thousands and thousands, while they're barely even on the scoreboard. (I assume we're keeping score by the standard method: counting the number of innocent civilians killed on a daily basis for no reason.) I'm surprised we even let them keep the "terrorist" title anymore, they just don't stack up. Terrorist-Contenders, or Terrorist-Wannabes, maybe.
:x :x :x

I hope you meant that as a joke. :x

edit: :x oh, its not even funny :x

Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:07 am
by Rayhawk
A joke! How dare you. This is satire!
Wikipedia wrote:Although satire is usually meant to be funny, the purpose of satire is not primarily humor in itself so much as an often quite angry attack on something the author strongly disapproves, using the weapon of wit.
Trust me, I've been putting out BrikWars text for years, I'm practically a satirical expert by now.

But anyway, you're right. In hindsight, all those WMD's we made up totally justify putting all those civilians to the torch every day. Sure, maybe in a logical world it would have been better to go after Al Qaida instead, or maybe someone vaguely related to them, but the important thing is that at least we're killing people in the same ethnic group. That'll teach 'em! Hooray for oil!

Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:20 am
by IVhorseman
but what about sarcasm and dramatic irony?

Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 2:04 am
by Rayhawk
Wikipedia (again) wrote:A very common, almost defining feature of satire is its strong vein of irony or sarcasm, but parody, burlesque, exaggeration, juxtaposition, comparison, analogy, and double entendre are all frequently used in satirical speech and writing. The essential point, however, is that "in satire, irony is militant". This "militant irony" (or sarcasm) often professes to approve the very things the satirist actually wishes to attack.

Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2008 8:53 am
by Matt
If that weren't so confusing I'd probably be mad.