Dark Potential Alpha Rules (Version 0.4.2, updated Oct 18)

Discuss MiniWarGaming's Post Apocalyptic Wargame here. NOTE: This game is a work in progress.
Forum rules
Please understand that by posting anything in this area of the forum that you are acknowledging that MiniWarGaming has permission to use your ideas without compensation.
Locked
User avatar
miniwargaming
Site Admin
Posts: 2837
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 2:38 pm

Dark Potential Alpha Rules (Version 0.4.2, updated Oct 18)

Post by miniwargaming » Fri Oct 19, 2012 9:55 am

A few minor changes to get ready for Beta.

You can download the rules here (Version 0.4.2, updated October 18, 2012):
http://www.darkpotential.com/downloads.php

Major Changes:
  1. Added Fly rules (please read and comment if it makes sense)
  2. A few minor word changes
  3. Changed "Add Grunt" to "Add Squad Member"
Feel free to reply to this topic with suggestions. If you have major areas you want to discuss, then please start a new thread here:
http://www.miniwargaming.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=122

Thanks in advance for your help!

Matthew

cymruvoodoo
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 8:49 am

Re: Dark Potential Alpha Rules (Version 0.4.2, updated Oct 1

Post by cymruvoodoo » Fri Oct 19, 2012 11:37 am

Had a thought the other day but didn't bring it up, might as well do so now:

Is there any reason not to rename the basic Reclaimer squad, currently called the Reclaimers, to something else? If not, why not Marines or Troopers? I know it's generic by comparison but I still find the idea of Reclaimer Reclaimers a little ridiculous.

Also, that test paintjob by WP is fantastic. I am really pleased to see that a different paint scheme from the concept art not only still works but in my opinion actually works a little better. Don't get me wrong, I like that west coast Asian-fusion look that the PMC concept art has got but this paint scheme ... it speaks to a much more scrappy existence, to a more outdoors lifestyle, has something of the Farscape/Firefly about it, which makes it incredibly appealing. It's that it maintains that cultural fusion note while balancing neon and rust - it speaks of opportunism and do-it-yourself types drawing on rich tradition and heritage but not bound by those things. The world of that color scheme is as big as the individual wants it to be but it never swallows him up. Good job to them for showing off what range the miniature can handle. I definitely can't wait to work on mine.

User avatar
miniwargaming
Site Admin
Posts: 2837
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 2:38 pm

Re: Dark Potential Alpha Rules (Version 0.4.2, updated Oct 1

Post by miniwargaming » Fri Oct 19, 2012 12:49 pm

I would like to rename them, but am not sure what to call them. It should be something army related, but definitely not marines, as that would be too much like Space Marines or Terran Marines as the Reclaimers are the ones wearing the closest thing to power armour.

cymruvoodoo
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 8:49 am

Re: Dark Potential Alpha Rules (Version 0.4.2, updated Oct 1

Post by cymruvoodoo » Fri Oct 19, 2012 3:02 pm

I can see that for sure. Well, why not start from first principles? It would help to know a bit more about the Reclaimers and the earth/colonial military from which they are descended. Was it a unified military command or were there divisions between naval and infantry branches? Was there any particular cultural heritage evident in the military structure before the war with the X'Lanthos? For example, was the military arranged in unified combat regiments or in DIY combat theatre brigades? That is, was there a strong regimental tradition or were units detailed their roles in combat based on experience and spreadsheets in HQ, regardless of regimental origin?

The problem is that most designations for unit types/troop types fall into one of two categories - very basic technical descriptions like marine, seabee, or dragoon or hereditary regimental designations drawn from the regimental colors, the region of origin, or the place where they are traditionally stationed, like Green Berets or Borderers. The majority of the basic technical designations have been used quite often and the ones that haven't been are generally very culture specific. There are still some options. Fusilier is not very commonly used in games and has been used in a number of different contexts so it is one possibility but it does not quite feel right. It's a bit too antiquated for the very high-tech feel of the faction. Cavalry names like Hussars, Dragoons, and Lancers work a bit better but of them only Dragoons feel at all right since the Hussars and the Lancers were both exclusively mounted troops. Dragoons also have not been used very often in modern gaming so that's definitely a possibility.

It still, however, is not an extremely modern-sounding name. It's much less era-limiting than something like fusilier but I think given the context of the rest of the faction we can do a bit better. Given the context of strong, close ranged firepower, elite unit statistics, and low numbers, something very modern like "strike team" sounds like it would fit the bill well. It sounds like commando operations, special training, and a very violence-oriented mindset.

However, looking at the faction names - Warden, Guards, Aegis, Redeemer, and the faction name itself, Reclaimers - I'm getting quite a "holy war" feel from them as a whole. That leads me to consider a name like "crusaders." It, despite superficially being antiquated, is not really very limiting as far as image, it's not too frequently used in the context of modern gaming, and it does help accentuate that theme in the faction names. At the end of the day, though, I have to say, I just don't think we know enough to make more constructive suggestions on that front.

hammerty10
Now we're getting somewhere...
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 1:36 am

Re: Dark Potential Alpha Rules (Version 0.4.2, updated Oct 1

Post by hammerty10 » Fri Oct 19, 2012 3:32 pm

A name for an infantry unit assigned to military warships...? The problem seems to be that "Marines" is almost a standard term. But instead of calling them Space Marines you could call them something like "Fleet Marines" or such. I kind of like the term "Rangers". The Greeks called their amphibious soldiers "Hoplites", but that does not roll off the tongue nicely.

It seems that you may need to go more generic a term like "Fleet Infantry". Of coarse you could just call them "Red Shirts"... ;-)

Maybe it needs to be some kind of Acronym that spells something interesting. Something like "Fleet Infantry Reconnaissance and Recovery Team" = FIRR Team...?

ashan46
MiniWarGaming Beginner
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2012 11:35 pm

Re: Dark Potential Alpha Rules (Version 0.4.2, updated Oct 1

Post by ashan46 » Fri Oct 19, 2012 6:39 pm

At last, the new rules. Tried them out today and games just feels so much smoother. Also, there is one question that was on my mind for a while on the game. After the full game is released, will there be expansions and add ons added later on in the game? Stuff like campaigns, new scenarios and factions(I have one idea), new optional rules, and maybe optional universal stuff?

I'm just so excited about the game I am just wondering if there are plans in the future to continue polishing Dark Potential into a precious gem of a game.

cymruvoodoo
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 8:49 am

Re: Dark Potential Alpha Rules (Version 0.4.2, updated Oct 1

Post by cymruvoodoo » Fri Oct 19, 2012 7:16 pm

hammerty10 wrote:A name for an infantry unit assigned to military warships...? The problem seems to be that "Marines" is almost a standard term. But instead of calling them Space Marines you could call them something like "Fleet Marines" or such. I kind of like the term "Rangers". The Greeks called their amphibious soldiers "Hoplites", but that does not roll off the tongue nicely.

It seems that you may need to go more generic a term like "Fleet Infantry". Of coarse you could just call them "Red Shirts"... ;-)

Maybe it needs to be some kind of Acronym that spells something interesting. Something like "Fleet Infantry Reconnaissance and Recovery Team" = FIRR Team...?
Rangers is not a bad suggestion. I am not so fond of the FIRR thing - the acronym can be a powerful tool, but maybe not for a core infantry unit? What about "Shore Patrol" or "Shore Detail?"

AkimboJonesx21
MiniWarGaming Veteran
Posts: 123
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 10:19 am

Re: Dark Potential Alpha Rules (Version 0.4.2, updated Oct 1

Post by AkimboJonesx21 » Sat Oct 20, 2012 12:55 pm

I have a few problems with the rules; mostly naming.

I do agree that the Reclaimer's Reclaimers name should be changed, but no to such a blatant militaristic term as "Marine" or "Ranger". The name needs to resemble speed and the ushering in of a new era. I suggest "Heralds". Heralds are the bringers of information. They are fast and mission oriented; A great name for such a mission oriented faction.

I also don't like the wording "Grav Jet Pack", for it is to clunky. I suggest calling it what it is; a "Jump Pack". I know that Jump Pack has been used in other games, but it really fits with the attributes of the equipment. The allocation of this equipment along with "Grav Packs" are also a big problem. The way I would allocate them would be as follows.
Captain - Upgradeable Grav Pack
Warden - Upgradeable Jump Pack
Reclaimers - Upgradeable Grav Pack
Drop Guard - Inherent Grav Packs, exchangeable Jump Packs
Aegis Guard - Upgradeable Jump Packs
Field Platform team - none
Forward Observer - Upgradeable Grav Pack
Redeemer - None
Spectre - Upgradeable Jump Pack

Also there is no listing of the Assassin's "Phase Field Generator" in the X'Lanthos Equipment Section. Please add.

Paradox-
MiniWarGaming Beginner
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:28 pm

Re: Dark Potential Alpha Rules (Version 0.4.2, updated Oct 1

Post by Paradox- » Sat Oct 20, 2012 3:56 pm

When the first wave of models are released:
1) how long till the others start being available (manipulator, Recruiter, phase troops, ect)
2) will terrain also be available at first at made of what (foam or plastic would be great as it make a the processes of getting the board to look good and cheap)

User avatar
Cow
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 319
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 2:09 am
Location: Campbell River, BC

Re: Dark Potential Alpha Rules (Version 0.4.2, updated Oct 1

Post by Cow » Sat Oct 20, 2012 10:48 pm

About Fly:
Makes sense for the most part. Maybe clarify what happens if you run out of movement in the air. Shouldn't falling damage be involved? Try removing "must end its movement on the ground" and instead just explain that fly type movements are a prime example of models ending their movement in the air which leads to them taking falling damage. After all, it's the same as regular moves diving off of ledges or being pulled out of a highrise by the Dark Manipulator!

On Reclaimer troops: Although this term could be used to describe the whole army, or other race's troops, I'd suggest "Task Force", or similar.
My wine coaster is a blast template.

My Tank is Fight!

My other shirt has a Psychic Hood

User avatar
Nerd13
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 211
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 10:42 am

Re: Dark Potential Alpha Rules (Version 0.4.2, updated Oct 1

Post by Nerd13 » Sun Oct 21, 2012 11:32 pm

AkimboJonesx21 wrote:I also don't like the wording "Grav Jet Pack", for it is to clunky. I suggest calling it what it is; a "Jump Pack". I know that Jump Pack has been used in other games, but it really fits with the attributes of the equipment.
I think to avoid crossover with Warhammer a new but suitable name like "Burst Jet" or something would be nice as Grav Jet Pack doesn't have a good ring to it.
Na'vun Sept (Tau)
Hive Fleet Colossus (Tyranids)
Spawn of Tli'Huan (Lizardmen)
Iron Pansies (Space Marines)
Frostghosts (Necrons)
Dragon's Fire (Warriors of Chaos/Chaos Daemons/Chaos Space Marines/Renegade Guard)

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest