MMP Roundtable 7 notes - February 2025

[Actionjick]

(I am sure to the regret of some as I don't believe in most of them outside of being optional rules).

I am not now, nor likely to ever be, in the "brain trust". That's OK with me. Someone needs to be on the outside so all the inside can feel superior (and in most cases actually BE superior). -- jim

Someone has to do it, might as well be you.

I have been in that situation several times in my various jobs. Generally opinions contrary to the group think are not appreciated.

One job insisted that I participate in the Safety Committee. I told them that wasn't a good idea as I would enforce the Safety Rules. They insisted and I became a PITA. The owner of the company was giving a tour of the shop to a potential customer. They weren't wearing Safety glasses. I made them go put them on. Don't give a rules lawyer any degree of power.

Btw the owner commended me for noticing his oversight.

 

[clubby]

So Journal 16 will include some pages of rules 'tweaks'! Curt mentioned Steve Pleva and Mike McGrath have put some proposed changes together. Foxholes got a mention!! Timing of repair dr got a mention!! Any information on what else might move from 'heretical' to 'official' or 'official/optional'?

Was it Pleva that had the rule where you didn't fix weapons in the rally phase, you fixed them when you wanted to shoot them as a kind of fog of war?

 

[Nineteen Kilo]

Was it Pleva that had the rule where you didn't fix weapons in the rally phase, you fixed them when you wanted to shoot them as a kind of fog of war?

I'm not a fan of that proposal. Too many scenarios designed with that rule already written as is. If optional (like the IIFT) I suppose that would be ok.

Now if somebody were to streamline the Punji Rules I would be a huge supporter.

 

[Actionjick]

Was it Pleva that had the rule where you didn't fix weapons in the rally phase, you fixed them when you wanted to shoot them as a kind of fog of war?

Kinda cool I guess but never was really a fan of Optional rules.

 

[Sparafucil3]

Was it Pleva that had the rule where you didn't fix weapons in the rally phase, you fixed them when you wanted to shoot them as a kind of fog of war?

I don't know if it is only him. It certainly is part of his Gor Gor Heretical rules used in his ASLOk Gor-Gor mini. -- jim

 

[Stewart]

While I appreciate Curt's time and effort put into these monthly updates, I think they are un-needed. I long for the old days when MMP's plans were as opaque as 6 hinderances! Concealment and HIP ruled the day! When something was put on pre-order it was a big deal. Surprised by the announcement, we rushed to pre-order what ever came out.



Rob

For some players, this is the only "blood rush" they get ....

 

[Jacometti]

I'm not a fan of that proposal. Too many scenarios designed with that rule already written as is. If optional (like the IIFT) I suppose that would be ok.

Now if somebody were to streamline the Punji Rules I would be a huge supporter.

Sharpen the Panji Rules, you mean?

 

['Ol Fezziwig]

Sharpen the Panji Rules, you mean?

Booooooo,

 

[clubby]

Sharpen the Panji Rules, you mean?

Two minute minor. High schticking.

 

[Steed]

Two minute minor. High schticking.

There's blood on the ice - make it a 5 min major.

 

[Hutch]

More like a Wedge:

A Wedge in the Ice BB09, one of two scenarios never published by MMP from Backblast Magazine.

 

[Chas]

If going down this road can we end the absurd a Stream end hex is not a Stream hex.

 

[Bill Kohler]

Changes I'm in favor of . . .
--Fixing stream-end hexes.
--Fixing Foxholes (can assault move in and out).
--Fixing OBA-loss and radio repairs. (I like the LHR-1B OBA Variant over the Pleva Variant.)
--AFV MAs--make repair attempts mandatory.
--Stopping Crews from popping out of vehicles to gain building control (without every scenario having to have an SSR preventing it: simply say vehicle crews cannot gain control of Locations/Buildings/Hexes).
--Clarify the Prisoners/Guards rule passage.
--If firing Ordnance at an ostensibly empty hex, assume firing at the terrain with ITT and HE unless specified otherwise. No changing between HE and AP after the fact, depending on what HIP unit is hiding there.
--Limiting ROF rips to the ROF number.

Things I'd hate to become mandatory rules:
--Repair weapons at any time: I really don't like this idea. We'd have to start tracking--"Gee, did I roll for this weapon repair already?" or toss yet another status counter onto our stacks. (There's little Fog of War in ASL, but that's okay. SASL tries to fix this with extra in-command DRs--yuck. Nor do I like keeping SW off the map: it's too confusing, too much is forgotten. Please just fix what's broken--don't try to make a new game.)
--ROF dice. I like throwing two dice, just two. Throw three dice and I have to sort out which two are the main dice--it's clutter and a distraction: no thank you. It would change every dice roll I make. This optional rule has been out there for decades and I've yet to play with anybody who wanted to use it.

Things I'm ambivalent about:
--Skulking.
--Bypass Freeze.

------------------------

Please MMP, if you're considering making big changes to the rules (like some of these are), solicit feedback from a large group of players before making the final decision. Or better yet, release them as optional rules and see if most players adopt them or don't: you can always make an optional rule mandatory at a later time if the lion's share of players start using it.

 

[gorkowskij]

Ditch the prisoner rules (A20) altogether! The juice isn't worth the squeeze. The game is about fire and maneuver, not personnel administration and "gotcha" which happens too often with prisoners. Instead, just suggest that a scenario depicting an action in which taking prisoners was a goal should award double CVP for units eliminated for failure to rout or destroyed in CC on the assumption that those cases "represent" taking prisoners.

Another of my dreams is to remove all crew counters from the game! Just assume that guns have crews and subject them to a stun process as a CE AFV. Similarly, AFV attacked through an unarmored facing never produce a crew counter and go through a stun process instead. Roll AFV crew survival for CVP purposes only.

Bypass freeze - by an AFV in motion - should also go.

The surest way to fix foxholes is to punish other skulking with a snap shot so that those not in foxholes have less incentive to skulk and therefore lose their statistical edge over foxholes which anchor occupants in place for fear of getting hit when they skulk, or flee.

 

[DVexile]

--Fixing Foxholes (can assault move in and out).

While FH are arguably broken as is, changing them would seem to potentially really upset the balance of many scenarios that include them. At this point there will always be far, far more scenarios of the past than scenarios of the future.

--AFV MAs--make repair attempts mandatory.

AFV full of MGs is simply too useful even without the MA. Tank crews could decide whether they needed to run away with a broken MA depending on what they were engaging. Forced MA repair combined with forced recall doesn't seem sensible across all scenarios (e.g. one side has a single AFV). Grudgers can SSR it if they want to already.

--Limiting ROF rips to the ROF number.

I like this one! Though, it would produce a bit of a tracking/counting problem in DFF.

--Repair weapons at any time: I really don't like this idea. We'd have to start tracking--"Gee, did I roll for this weapon repair already?" or toss yet another status counter onto our stacks. (There's little Fog of War in ASL, but that's okay. SASL tries to fix this with all sorts of extra in-command DRs--yuck. Nor do I like keeping SW off the map: it's too confusing, too much is forgotten. Please, just fix the things that're broken--don't try to make a new game.)

Good point! Repair anytime seems like a fair bit of housekeeping for only a little bit more fog of war. Fun optional rule for those that don't mind doing that.

The SW off the map SSRs are easy in VASL, a pain with cardboard. Best as an option therefore.

--ROF dice. I like throwing two dice, just two. Throw three dice and I have to sort out which two are the main dice--it's clutter and a distraction: no thank you. It would change every dice roll I make. This optional rule has been out there for decades and I've yet to play with anybody who wanted to use it.

Yeah, given what ROF is suppose to represent I also have a problem with rolling 5,6 and then getting ROF with a third die coming up 1.

Please MMP, if you're considering making big changes to the rules (like some of these are), solicit feedback from a large group of players before making the final decision.

Absolutely! Things should have a pretty broad consensus with long time players to make the cut in my opinion.

 

[Actionjick]

Ditch the prisoner rules (A20) altogether! The juice isn't worth the squeeze. The game is about fire and maneuver, not personnel administration and "gotcha" which happens too often with prisoners. Instead, just suggest that a scenario depicting an action in which taking prisoners was a goal should award double CVP for units eliminated for failure to rout or destroyed in CC on the assumption that those cases "represent" taking prisoners.

Another of my dreams is to remove all crew counters from the game! Just assume that guns have crews and subject them to a stun process as a CE AFV. Similarly, AFV attacked through an unarmored facing never produce a crew counter and go through a stun process instead. Roll AFV crew survival for CVP purposes only.

Bypass freeze - by an AFV in motion - should also go.

The surest way to fix foxholes is to punish other skulking with a snap shot so that those not in foxholes have less incentive to skulk and therefore lose their statistical edge over foxholes which anchor occupants in place for fear of getting hit when they skulk, or flee.

Punish skulking??!! Where's my heart attack aspirin?

 

[Actionjick]

While FH are arguably broken as is, changing them would seem to potentially really upset the balance of many scenarios that include them. At this point there will always be far, far more scenarios of the past than scenarios of the future.



AFV full of MGs is simply too useful even without the MA. Tank crews could decide whether they needed to run away with a broken MA depending on what they were engaging. Forced MA repair combined with forced recall doesn't seem sensible across all scenarios (e.g. one side has a single AFV). Grudgers can SSR it if they want to already.



I like this one! Though, it would produce a bit of a tracking/counting problem in DFF.



Good point! Repair anytime seems like a fair bit of housekeeping for only a little bit more fog of war. Fun optional rule for those that don't mind doing that.

The SW off the map SSRs are easy in VASL, a pain with cardboard. Best as an option therefore.



Yeah, given what ROF is suppose to represent I also have a problem with rolling 5,6 and then getting ROF with a third die coming up 1.



Absolutely! Things should have a pretty broad consensus with long time players to make the cut in my opinion.

I'm not sure what effect changing some of these rules would have on scenario " balance ". Scenario balance is a concept that I give very little consideration to so take that statement with a grain of salt.

 

[Actionjick]

I'm not sure what effect changing some of these rules would have on scenario " balance ". Scenario balance is a concept that I give very little consideration to so take that statement with a grain of salt.

Seriously though if a scenario is in such a state that changing the Foxhole rules totally unbalances it perhaps reworking the scenario is in order.

 

[PresterJohn]

Any rule changes should also make consideration for new players who don't care or know about the history of SL and have other games they can choose to play. If another game gives a better sense of being in the battle, rather than ASL, because of an few odd rules then do you really want to cut off that opportunity to increase the player base.

 

[Bill Kohler]

Any rule changes should also make consideration for new players who don't care or know about the history of SL and have other games they can choose to play. If another game gives a better sense of being in the battle, rather than ASL, because of an few odd rules then do you really want to cut off that opportunity to increase the player base.

ASL, IMO, has some features that won't appeal to many younger players, and by far the biggest of these--and the biggest barrier to entry for new players--is the great complexity and depth of the rules (a complexity and depth which I love BTW). IMO changing ≤ 1% of the rules isn't going to make the slightest bit of difference in that regard.

Other features also work against younger players getting interested in ASL . . .
--The war having ended 80 years ago. (When I was born, WW2 had ended only 17 years beforehand, while the ACW had ended 97 years beforehand--which meant I had much less interest in the latter, in large part due to the "ancientness" of it.) And most of the war movies on TV as I grew up were about WW2--that also helped.
--The ultilitarian [and perhaps dated] fonts and artwork. (Which I also don't wish to see changed: I prefer them to, say, the many-colored fonts and colored silhouettes on many of GMT's games.)
--The fact that it's not played on a cell phone with whiz-bang graphics and social media interaction.
--The now-dated "I-go, You-go" turn structure, and how every rule rests on the advantages (and disadvantages) of that structure.
--The large number of core modules one has to purchase.

And in the end when you try to make a product into something it isn't, you almost always fail attracting the new target while also alienating the old target.

OTOH a lot of things are "dumbed down" nowadays. Yet I think there're people out there who yearn for more. So instead of trying to streamline the complexity of ASL, maybe we should lean into it. Instead of telling new players, "There's pages and pages of rules you have to learn", you say, "Do you know a crew can have the tank shot out beneath them, hop out, grab a big house-blasting gun, fire it at the enemy at point blank range, only to turn them into screaming berserkers who charge out of the down-raining rubble and come at you in hand-to-hand combat!"

ASL: Not for Rule Wimps!