General Striker Revisited?

[mega-striker]

I am an old time fan of the original Striker. Getting back into gaming after about 25 years I am still interested in that game. But, despite the description and perhaps intentions the level of combat detail suits it better for skirmish (say a squad or two per side) games as opposed to company to battalion level. It is also stuck in 1980s game design limitations.

So this thread is multi level.

First I know there are people still interested in Striker to this day. I am but from a different direction and looking for like minded gamers. That direction is making the game work with fire team to squad size units who would make a single roll as opposed to one per figure.

Secondly is; is there a game out there (which I have missed or by passed as I have looked at maybe two dozen sets of rules or games in the last few years) which may suit my interests in game scale as above? I am a strong believer of why make new if something already does the job.

Thirdly I would like to keep the skirmish level of game which original Striker works at but to match a cleaner and quicker combat results system. Preferably one which is fully compatible with one and two above.

Four, still keeping the above in mind I worked up something like a hundred more rules to cover aspects in the original Striker which were missed, glossed over or just plain beyond what any sane person would attempt. I also changed a lot of the rules and many design sequence sections to further detail vehicle designs.

Much more to come but I have to start somewhere. Please keep in mind all this is in my Traveller universe and nothing is cannon. I have to add that part to satisfy the moderators but frankly what I have done and propose is and will be outside the original game.

 

[kilemall]

I'm big on Striker and I did a deep dive with it in the CT forum.

I don't know to what extent I can help you with your specific issues, as I went the other way, use Striker for the RPG combat and made it wonkier with hit location/armor mixes such that a pistol can potentially do 6D of damage or you might survive a plasma gun hit (likely no extremity left though) but they average to their classic damage levels.



My first thought is roll direct fire weapons as is but apply whatever numbers mismatch to weapons fired vs. targets as a damage modifier, then apply to the personnel wound roll, and the wound roll indicates either numbers down or total unit state.

So if you have 5 shooting against 10, you use the weapon pen vs, protecting cover/armor as normal but apply -5 as well. Or vice versa, 10 against 5 and it's +5 to the damage roll.


You could use wound levels to indicate how many down- Light is 10% down, Serious is 20% down, Death is 40% down. Or, apply the state to the unit as a whole same as an individual.

Units are going to have to have either general status of being recruit/veteran/elite, or some extra fiddly roll to determine if a better rating soldier got damaged in a unit hit. This particularly counts for leaders and the morale rules.



Vehicles are powerful and in the low numbers of 10 or less per side should probably maintain their rules.

If however we are talking serious armor/firepower battles with more then 10 per side, probably best to just simplify and use the personnel wound table again, with light wounds applying negatives as per vehicle crew recruit/veteran/elite state, serious wounds disabling the vehicle, and dead destroying the vehicle.


Int he case of artillery hits, I think you would have to have unit dispersal depending once again on your rating level- recruits will be huddled together in order to stay effective and allow the leader to maintain control/orders/morale. More skilled units can disperse more and reduce the amount of damage any arty hit has.


Speaking of the morale rules and orders, at a larger scale of unit size you as the player/leader are going to have a span of control that goes to the subordinate units you are directing. As such it's going to be very important to determine what state of leadership your units are at to tell how effective they will be in executing and maintaining cohesion, and when it's time to send reserve leaders or yourself to fix a lost command/control situation.

 

[mike wightman]

MegaTraveller is what you need to look at.

The Referee Companion book includes rules for combining units into larger formations and since MT's numbers are based on Striker you can move between the two.

Keep Striker for the platoon and lower scale engagement, but once you are maneuvering platoons as units of companies or companies as subunits of battalions then the MegaTraveller Referee's Companion is the way to go.

 

[mega-striker]

Kilemall

I will have to look at your threads(?). I assume you mean the classic traveller section here.

Mike

Thank you. I forgot about that. I have dug out my MT companion and will review that section.

 

[whartung]

Striker II uses "stands". Each stand is either an individual vehicle, a single person stand (notably a leader or commander), or a unit of 4 men (fire team, basically). It also has larger, "double", ones to represent weapon crews.

This is an example:

Gamma Company, 6th Battalion, 4518th Lift Infantry Regiment, 
The Duke of Regina's Own Huscarles, with:
    Company Headquarters, with: 
        1 operational command stand
    3 JumpTroop Platoons, each with 
        1 tactical command stand
        1 support infantry stand
        3 JumpTroop Squads, each with:
            1 tactical command stand 
            2 infantry stands

So, this Company has 34 stands total, 21 are fireteams. Each platoon is 11 stands each. Each squad is 3 stands each: 2 fire teams and a commander.

It's 97 people, assuming 4 per infantry stand and 1 per command stand.

This may be too high resolution than what you're thinking.

 

[mega-striker]

Thanks guys. Give me a week now to find and digest what you have recommended.

 

[mega-striker]

Looked at Large Scale combat in the Mega Traveller Ref Comp

Mike

I looked this up today while waiting for my car to be worked on at the dealer.

All I took with me was the MT ref's companion. Unfortunately combat, especially what is needed to determine and understand large scale, is spread out over 3 books. In addition to MTRC you need the player's and referee's manuals and a lot of the explanations are spread out over combat and tasks so the whole thing is more of a game of search. Annoying but I did get the idea.


I thought combat in MT was based on Striker. To an extent it is bit it is also simplified and complicated by the inclusion of the task mechanic. Understandable but instead of putting it all in one place as I said it is spread over the three books in multiple sections. It can be gathered into one set of rules, and it looks like it might be worth that effort. Except I will review Striker 2 first.

The intended scale is too big for my needs. It seems like it can be adjusted but...

 

[mega-striker]

Kilemall: suggested threads please

I looked at CT and searched for Striker. It returned 18 pages of results. In the first 3 pages I only found one thread started by you. I have pulled it out and will review. Can you please advise me of any other threads which you feel are worthwhile? Thank you in advance.

 

[aramis]

I thought combat in MT was based on Striker. To an extent it is bit it is also simplified and complicated by the inclusion of the task mechanic. Understandable but instead of putting it all in one place as I said it is spread over the three books in multiple sections. It can be gathered into one set of rules, and it looks like it might be worth that effort. Except I will review Striker 2 first.

The intended scale is too big for my needs. It seems like it can be adjusted but...

MegaTraveller separates damage from penetration; this allows asymmetric unit sizes, since a unit's fire is average weapon skill, average penetration, but summed damages, of the weapons. So a fireteam of 1 FGMP-14 and 3 9mm ACRs using DS, that's (34+6+6+6)/4 Pen, or 13 pen, and 23 damage on nominal hit....
Note that, at the referee's option, the weapons may be sorted into two separate profiles...specifically,because 13 pen doesn't threaten ships nor APCs... but 34 does, and getting the 14 damage with a low-pen is far better than 23 with no-pen....

Also, the lack of Striker's C&C rules, and several other important bits do make the two rather different in practice.

 

[TNE2300]

to reduce the number of die rolls
I've been toying with this

each fire team uses a 'common attack die' (of a different color)
and each member uses only one instead of two

each members die has the common die added to it

so instead of 4 separate attack rolls
there is only one
but still 4 separate results

not perfect
the common die can make things a little 'swingy'
a good common roll and everybody hits
a bad one and everybody misses

also, can have different weapon types in the same roll
by using another different color die

 

[mega-striker]

MegaTraveller separates damage from penetration; this allows asymmetric unit sizes, since a unit's fire is average weapon skill, average penetration, but summed damages, of the weapons. So a fireteam of 1 FGMP-14 and 3 9mm ACRs using DS, that's (34+6+6+6)/4 Pen, or 13 pen, and 23 damage on nominal hit....
Note that, at the referee's option, the weapons may be sorted into two separate profiles...specifically,because 13 pen doesn't threaten ships nor APCs... but 34 does, and getting the 14 damage with a low-pen is far better than 23 with no-pen....

Also, the lack of Striker's C&C rules, and several other important bits do make the two rather different in practice.

Separating penetration from damage does make sense, but adds more work. Ideally I like the system used in Conflict of Heroes where each unit has an attack value and a defense value. Roll two dice, add the attack value and subtract any modifiers for terrain the target occupies and range modifiers. Compare this to the target's defense value. Equal or greater and the target takes a hit (pull a random chit for effect). Exceed the defense by 4 and the target is eliminated. Get a second hit on the target and it is eliminated if it did not rally the previous hit off. Neta and clean but would require some book keeping before the game.

 

[mega-striker]

TNE2300

Give me a step by step example please.

 

[whartung]

each fire team uses a 'common attack die' (of a different color)
and each member uses only one instead of two

each members die has the common die added to it

so instead of 4 separate attack rolls
there is only one
but still 4 separate results

Honestly this just sounds like reducing the number of dice rolled, but the number of "rolls" is the same.

This sounds like 5 dice in total are rolled (the common and individual ones for each team member, but still 4 results), rather than 8 (2 for each member, still 4 results).

At a glance, for modeling "basic combat", I don't care for this, as the common roll affects the entire team. Roll a 1 on that die, and the entire team suffers. Similarly roll 6 and everyone profits.

This seems to make that effects have a surge like nature. Contrive example, roll a 1 on the common die, the entire team fails. Roll a 6, then entire team succeeds. That's a lot of weight on a single die.

And, in practice, I don't know if it would save anything. The cognitive load of 4 + 1 die, vs just pairing up 8 dice. Having played a lot of Star Fleet Battles where which is notorious for handfuls of dice thrown, we get quite adept at sorting dice in to pairs. The nice part is once sorted, the results are always obvious, easy for all to see, and remain until they're all scooped up. I guess you could position the dice in a cross of five, with the common die in the middle and the individual ones on each face.

That's just me though.

 

[kilemall]

Separating penetration from damage does make sense, but adds more work. Ideally I like the system used in Conflict of Heroes where each unit has an attack value and a defense value. Roll two dice, add the attack value and subtract any modifiers for terrain the target occupies and range modifiers. Compare this to the target's defense value. Equal or greater and the target takes a hit (pull a random chit for effect). Exceed the defense by 4 and the target is eliminated. Get a second hit on the target and it is eliminated if it did not rally the previous hit off. Neta and clean but would require some book keeping before the game.

The Striker tweak I outline translates the penetration as half of the damage variable in terms of dice damage, +3D to -3D. That allows for more likely to average out damage as per classic damage.


The other part, hit location, allows for handling things like having only a helmet for head damage, or Cloth vest covering the torso but arms and legs are unarmored. Baseline +1D extremities, +2D torso, +3D head.


Blunt damage like from a mace, fusion gun or concussion-inducing pressure waves can add +1D, so armor will likely reduce damage while a wide kinetic force shot will tack it back on.


The other part I didn't get into in the CT Striker post is that hit location combined with whether the hits counted against STR DEX and/or END allows description of the wound. I have medical rules that tie STR to skeletal/muscular/cardio systems, DEX to neurological/sensory perception and END to digestive/cardio/immune systems. Makes combat far more personal and allows for medical drama for the Medic to diagnose and treat.

 

[The Oz]

If you're willing to look at other systems, you could try DIRTSIDE II from Ground Zero Games. I don't think it's in print anymore, but you can get a pdf of the rules from GZG at this location:
https://shop.groundzerogames.co.uk/rules.html

 

[Bryan H Rombough]

If you're willing to look at other systems, you could try DIRTSIDE II from Ground Zero Games. I don't think it's in print anymore, but you can get a pdf of the rules from GZG at this location:
https://shop.groundzerogames.co.uk/rules.html

Dirtside II was written for 6mm minis and company to battalion sized actions though. GZG's Stargrunt II, which you can download from the same page, was written for 15-25mm minis and platoon to company sized battles.

 

[mega-striker]

My thoughts thus far. Thank you for your input;

kilemall

I guess we will have to disagree wrt game scale for a Striker "update". For skirmish level games I like the old Snapshot and AHL at that scale, this is not where I want to go with THIS version of Striker. I guess I have always been on the upper scale of what Striker was intended to present and because of that found it lacking. Thank you for the input though.

2300

I have to agree with Warthung on your use of one plus dice. The first dice really determines the rest's success so why roll all of them? Again, applied to any version this reduces the total number of dice rolled but doesn't address my intent of reducing combat to single rolls by units or groups of units.

kilemall

You post from the 20th is good for dealing with player characters or major NPCs while playing any version as written but not my interest to move to larger units. It strikes me a lot like the MT work on dealing with characters who are part of a team.

OZ

I have dirtside II and just to refresh myself (looking at so many rules they are running together in my head now) I reviewed just infantry combat. IMHO infantry combat has, is and will always be the centre point of any game. Tanks and other war machines will never replace individual soldier, just complement them. DS II, like my original set of micro armour rules, Tractics, infantry is treated as a poor second to armour. Also IIRC, and I did a quick review and THINK I am correct, DS II has a few sizes of fixed items like 3 hull sizes (for example not specific) 4 power plants and 2 to 4 sizes of each weapon. I loved the design sequences in Striker and the very fine results obtainable. My buddy and I used to spend hours designing up everything imaginable and frankly the design sequence, much like character creation in Traveller, was a game in it's own.

Bryan

I game with 6mm almost exclusively so that is far from a detriment. I only use 15mm for skirmish (individual figure) games like Snapshot or Battlespace.

All

I need to do a dive into Striker II. Some of it seems where I want to go and despite my original misgivings (assumptions) it may be closest. I also have Strike Legion tactical which turned me off immediately with their very early statement that all troops need to stand within an inch of their leaders (squad level I believe) which was so at odds with Striker's ideal (to me) need to be in communications regardless of distance. However, because of that I tossed the whole thing aside without a reasonable look so I will remedy this.

I hope I made it clear above but one aspect of what I am looking for is an infantry centric system. Armour, heavy weapons, artillery, ortillery, even animal and trooper powered transport is all secondary. It is as true today and will always be that armour or air power cannot hold ground. They, and the other assets, can help win or hold ground but that holding has to be done by individuals.

 

[mega-striker]

Strike Legion: Not so good

Well as I assumed SL isn't so good. Again infantry is just window dressing for all those minis you bought. In fact that whole section is recommended as a "skip this section" in the rules compendium. So I was going to add it to the recycle bin but there are lots of ideas and areas addressed which might be of use in the future for further expansions of Striker to make it worth while keeping around.

 

[mega-striker]

Striker III from FFE

Quick look and it appears to be skirmish level again (individually based figures) so at this time I will not look any closer.

 

[mega-striker]

Striker II

Well had a quick look at this Frank Chadwick revision and it is basically Mega Traveller large scale combat in a new wrapper. Again not where I want to go.

So this leaves me two possible paths.

1. Look a bit more and if nothing strikes my fancy work up my own game based around what else I have played and liked. If anyone here is interested let me know and I can either start a new topic or carry on here on this one. If no one cares for this level of play I can understand it as i said I was looking at an update of Striker. To a partial extent Striker II and MT large scale combat are in that direction but I want to go further.

2. If no one is interested or wants me to carry on, maybe in a new thread, I still have a ton of expanded rules, design sequence additions and some other aspects of original Striker I wrote. I would be willing to share and discuss them freely with others in hopes of bringing my ideal skirmish game further along.

So please let me know if you want me to continue and in which direction for discussion here. Also if there are threads already here which would add to this discussion or would be the best place to add my stuff please let me know or link to them. Thank you.