rubber-police

Author Topic: Leadership  (Read 2508 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Clark

  • Overlord
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
Leadership
« on: April 10, 2011, 06:04:58 PM »
I wanted to start a general thread to deal with how it works presently and how it should work for 3e.

This arises out of the fact that it is considered (with suppression) to be the most complex rule in the game. What I've seen is that it creates an additional level of tactics and strategy in the basic game where it is a renewable human resource the machines have to figure out a way to neutralize.

While I've never heard of any criticisms about the basics, the obvious one is that there are unrealistic elements to the way it works, particularly the way you can effectively dodge bullets in some circumstances.

In any event, there are some points that need to be explored and then clarified.

Leadership points are the foundation and we also have command points and hero points which are limited forms (although command has some things beyond leadership).

As I posted and discussed the "Survivors" story I began to think about 'inspiration points' which would be leadership that can only be assigned. Chaplains, standard bearers and others would have no inherent bad-assery but having them on the board would aid other figs (note Capt. Andrews might have full blown leadership points. At a minimum, he has two hero points since he fired first).

So the first question is what people think about the idea of inspiration points?
Secondly, does anyone have any other suggestions for 'points' that could reflect additional sci fi battle phenomena?

Then there are the mechanical questions. I will start with three.

The rules as published say that you can assign a number of leadership points equal to the receiving figure's leadership plus one. Over the years my opinion has become that you can assign one figure one leadership and a figure can receive one leadership, period. So that would prevent the sergeant from assigning his two leadership to the corporal to make him a supersoldier. Similarly, the corporal and sergeant could not assign one leadership each to a heavy weapon trooper who is out of line of sight so he could fire again.

Next is the issue of priorities. Leadership actions trump everything except suppression, but what do we do where both players have leadership available?  My fix is to make it LIFO (last in first out) which Magic apparently uses. That is, if you have two or more players who can use leadership, the last to declare is the first to be resolved. I like this for its mechanical simplicity and the fact that it can generate a Mexican Standoff like if a Succubot and a UNE sergeant found themselves face to face: neither would blow their two leadership to fire because the other could then declare but go first. And that seems to reflect the filmography of mano-a-mano final battles.

The last one I will throw out to you now is whether directed or assigned leadership (one, either or both) can go up the chain of command. The basic question is whether the corporal can yell at the sergeant "Enemy left!" and the give sarge a leadership point to do something about it?

Offline Clark

  • Overlord
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
Re: Leadership
« Reply #1 on: April 10, 2011, 07:09:32 PM »
This may seem esoteric but it come from the mind of a gamer turned lawyer turned game designer.

Should 2 leadership grant a fire action unless otherwise noted, or should 2 leadeship only allow those actions defined as fire actions unless specifically noted?

Offline sergeant_hastp

  • Succubot
  • ***
  • Posts: 110
Re: Leadership
« Reply #2 on: April 10, 2011, 07:47:29 PM »

Since I based all of my UNE troops on people in my RL platoon and company, I developed what I called 'Loser Points' for lack of a better term.  These were the opposite of Hero points.  They took points off the cost of a figure, and that figure was given a -1 movement point.  They could ignore the movement penalty for a turn, but that would automatically make them 'fired' at the end of their move.

This was to simulate those individuals who are either really green, or they are consistently non-performers.

Obviously not a big issue if you assume that the UNE PI forces are the best of the best...but it was fun when playing with other people in my unit, who also know the people in question.  Kind of an inside joke.

"It's Private X's turn.  And once again, he's falling behind.  Move your ass!"  lol.

As for the other points:

I do not think you should be allowed to send leadership 'up hill'.  It's the sergeant's responsibility to see that ambush....that's why he's got those two of his own.
  If he's already spent his two points, his attention is obviously elsewhere to the point that the corporal's warning won't help.

Another option, and maybe this is already taken into account with the assigning of leadership...but what about Fragmentary Orders.

The squad fights there way to an objective...now they are there.  They take that quick moment to confirm who does what...and then they execute it.

Perhaps something along the lines of Spend a leadership to generate 2 hero-type points...each going to a separate figure.  These are used in the following turn.  The leader doesn't get his spent leadership back until all those hero-type points are used.

Offline Dave Chase

  • Succubot
  • ***
  • Posts: 242
Re: Leadership
« Reply #3 on: April 10, 2011, 08:27:44 PM »
I wanted to start a general thread to deal with how it works presently and how it should work for 3e.

...

Leadership points are the foundation and we also have command points and hero points which are limited forms (although command has some things beyond leadership).

As I posted and discussed the "Survivors" story I began to think about 'inspiration points' which would be leadership that can only be assigned. Chaplains, standard bearers and others would have no inherent bad-assery but having them on the board would aid other figs (note Capt. Andrews might have full blown leadership points. At a minimum, he has two hero points since he fired first).

So the first question is what people think about the idea of inspiration points?
Secondly, does anyone have any other suggestions for 'points' that could reflect additional sci fi battle phenomena?


I like the concept. If you are wanting some thing different yet beneficial then why not have these inspiration points effect something else, like morale or medical (it's only a wound).

The morale benefit is for rallying, encouragement (under suppressive fire Planetstorm), and fear factors (Arch Fiend appears in front of the troops and the Chaplin boldly says, "Remember men its only a machine. Now shoot the bastard."

For medical only, it allows the shock/morale roll to be modified in the positive for the troops, since they know that the wounded will receive immediate help and the dead will be marked for pickup before the Machines get their hands on the bodies. Not a powerful as say the Chaplin or Action Movie star but still effective.

That way, these inpiration points do potentially effect the game but not as powerful as Leadership or Command. Both Leadership and Command can also be used to the same effect but has to be spent, where just having the above figures in your group, it is automatic.

But if you lose such figure, the normal positive bonus is applied as a negative right that moment and if required an immediate roll. And you lose the benefit for the rest of the game.

Quote

Then there are the mechanical questions. I will start with three.

The rules as published say that you can assign a number of leadership points equal to the receiving figure's leadership plus one. Over the years my opinion has become that you can assign one figure one leadership and a figure can receive one leadership, period. So that would prevent the sergeant from assigning his two leadership to the corporal to make him a supersoldier. Similarly, the corporal and sergeant could not assign one leadership each to a heavy weapon trooper who is out of line of sight so he could fire again.


Sounds fine. I think the only ones who might even have a slight heartburn over this are us older players who liked the initial rules. Me, as long as the board/playing field is standardized across the board with little to no, exceptions, I like it.


Quote
Next is the issue of priorities. Leadership actions trump everything except suppression, but what do we do where both players have leadership available?  My fix is to make it LIFO (last in first out) which Magic apparently uses. That is, if you have two or more players who can use leadership, the last to declare is the first to be resolved. I like this for its mechanical simplicity and the fact that it can generate a Mexican Standoff like if a Succubot and a UNE sergeant found themselves face to face: neither would blow their two leadership to fire because the other could then declare but go first. And that seems to reflect the filmography of mano-a-mano final battles.
OK, so if a figure has multi-leadership points or has a Leadership point figure of higher rank with in LOS of the said leadership figure then this possibility exists:
UNE Corporal with 1 natural Leadership, one assigned leadership and a Sergeant in LOS to the corporal with 2 remaining active Leadership comes across a Fantasian with 2 Hero points. The Corporal declares he is using the assigned Leadership and his natural leadership to fire on the Fantasian, the Fantasian declares that he is firing on the Corporal, but the Sgt, declares that he is spending both his leadership points to cause the corporal to fire.
Action takes place as follows, Corporal fires first, then if the Fantasian survives, he fires, then if the corporal survives he fires again?
Of course if the Fantasian is eliminated from the Sgt’s leadership order to fire, the corporal should either still lose the 2 leadership points (as in used this turn) or the corporal still has to fire but it is considered a limited suppression fire, straight line. Ie The first anything in the direct line draw from the corporal to the Fantasian and beyond is checked to see if it is hit.

Quote

The last one I will throw out to you now is whether directed or assigned leadership (one, either or both) can go up the chain of command. The basic question is whether the corporal can yell at the sergeant "Enemy left!" and the give sarge a leadership point to do something about it?

Nice idea but I would want it limited and very specific as to why it can happen.
My thoughts on this are;
If a lower level ranked NCO (officer) has both Hero and Leadership points, they can use said leadership only to move/order a superior officer (NCO) but can only expend a number of Leadership points equal to or less than the number of Hero points that the figure has.

So, a corporal with 1 or more Hero points could only use their one Leadership during a turn to a higher officer (NCO).
A Sgt with 2 Leadership and one Hero point could only use in the active turn 1 Leadership to a higher NCO (officer) at a time, but he could use both leadership points on 2 separate occasions (even if it is the same figure but just can not give the figure a command that takes 2 actions).
If said Sgt had 2 or more Hero points, then he could use both on the same figure.

Dave Chase
Freedom is the right to speak your mind.

It is also the right to walk away from those you don't want to listen to.

Offline smokingwreckage

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Mk III Assault Fiend
  • ****
  • Posts: 274
Re: Leadership
« Reply #4 on: April 12, 2011, 05:40:40 AM »
I like the idea of limiting received leadership to 1 point. Having the Cpl and Sgt assign one each seems hinky, making it less about inspired, creative leadership (the hallmark of sentients versus the machines) and more about magical power points.

Mexican standoff seems a bit annoying, since it's theoretically an infinite duration. I'd give players the option of simultaneous action: write it down, turn it over. Much quicker in play, nicely tactical.

To my mind, leadership flowing UP seems sound. These guys are linked into some sort of command and communications net, right? The Cpl could be tagging threats the Sgt hasn't seen yet. Soldiers probably wouldn't have the privileges or permissions to affect another's tactical display/ threat tracking. I endorse the idea of this being limited to 1 point. A higher ranking officer might take advice, but probably won't "jump when I say jump!" for a junior officer, right?

However, down-only makes sense from an organisational sense, especially once you start dealing with normal military. Perhaps being able to share Leadership points UP is a special rule for commandos and other elite units? One where officers might be expected to routinely have a very high degree of implicit trust in the judgement of those beneath them in rank? It might also be a special rule for members of relatively small national armies... Australia springs to mind.

Offline Clark

  • Overlord
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
Re: Leadership
« Reply #5 on: April 12, 2011, 08:07:18 AM »
But I think there is no question that you can use leadership on the college pimp who commands the platoon, even if he outranks you?

Offline Kindred

  • Overlord
  • Trade Count: (2)
  • *****
  • Posts: 212
    • Turtle Shell Productions
Re: Leadership
« Reply #6 on: April 12, 2011, 09:59:42 AM »
Isn't that the job of almost every sergeant  in a platoon/squad?
hand-hold the lieutenant/captain who has no real combat experience and teach him how to actually LEAD a combat platoon (all the while making sure that it looks like it was the CO's idea)

Offline grendeljd

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Mk III Assault Fiend
  • ****
  • Posts: 365
    • My Deviantart Gallery
Re: Leadership
« Reply #7 on: April 12, 2011, 11:53:23 AM »
So, with the idea of limiting assigned leadership to one per figure, does this then eliminate any possibility of a figure with no natural leadership being able to fire a second time, or can a figure with assigned leadership also receive the second point required from another figure within line-of-sight? either way, I think I like the limit, and I agree with 'downstream only'.

As far as the issue with resolving leadership enforced fire actions, how about it becoming a 'mutual assured destruction' idea - if two figures are engaged in a second fire action by using leadership, both results could then be considered simultaneous? I'd hate to see the leadership aspect of the game turn into anything like 'magical power points' as smokingwreckage stated - too much like Magic; The Gathering with their Instants/Interrupts one-up-manship.

If the idea of leadership is to simulate fast action thinking/reacting, how far can you take it before it goes beyond any semblance of realism? In the split second of any action, there is only so much time to react to it, not an infinite amount of time to react and counter-react to supersede or prevent said action from happening... although I do think it would be rare to see it get too out of hand in LoS considering the general amount of leadership available to units within a game.
I hate people generally, but I like them specifically - John Malkovich

Offline smokingwreckage

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Mk III Assault Fiend
  • ****
  • Posts: 274
Re: Leadership
« Reply #8 on: April 13, 2011, 04:34:30 AM »
I was thinking you could only be assigned Ld from one Leader, rather than strictly 1 point.

Offline Clark

  • Overlord
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
Re: Leadership
« Reply #9 on: April 13, 2011, 06:54:05 AM »
With the one point assignment cap, a figure with no natural leadership could not get an extra fire action through assigned leadership; they would have to be in line of sight of the sergeant.

I think back to Star Fleet Battles and what a PITA it was to write down your firing intentions in secret and then reveal.  I also found "me too" firing to be annoying which is why I was looking for something more elegant. 

Offline Clark

  • Overlord
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
Re: Leadership
« Reply #10 on: April 28, 2011, 09:56:25 PM »
29. The outcome of most battles depends upon leadership, notably the leadership of
platoon and section commanders. The leader in battle has to make things happen,
where otherwise there would be inertia of a highly dangerous and contagious kind.
Field Marshal Lord Slim summed this up when he stated:
"When times are bad ...there will come a sudden
pause when your men stop and look at you. No one
will speak; they will just look at you and expect
leadership. Their courage
1-

I found that in the CF Infrantry Pam.