Designing a new Lock 'n Load: On Josh McCown, Rebecca Black, and a Better Tactical Game
It's been ten years since I designed Lock 'n Load, the
flagship game series of Lock 'n Load Publishing. I'm still deeply involved in
the system, currently finishing up the Pacific Theater module, Heroes of thePacific. Better still, I thoroughly enjoy every Lock 'n Load scenario I test.
Despite, or perhaps because of, this enjoyment I fantasize about designing a
new tactical system. One that improves on Lock 'n Load. Something that would
give us all as much pleasure without any nit-picky rule pain. So what would a
new Mark H. Walker tactical system look like?
Here are some things I would and wouldn't include.
- No
fractions. Period. No halve this, or round this. Whole numbers only. I
figure a game loses about 1/8th of its fan base per fraction. Seriously.
- No vehicles.
None. At least not in the first module. Vehicles are a pain in the neck.
Like vehicles? Play a game made for them. Something like MBT.
- No levels. No second story buildings and no hills. We all gasp at the mere suggestion of a one-level game, but I promise that no one would miss it. Levels create paragraphs on paragraphs of needless rules, and in-game delays as we pour through said rules trying to ascertain if this machine gunner can see that squad. Delays better spent talking about Josh McCown.
- No combat result tables and no firepower factors. Everything hits or defends on a four. Firepower is a function of dice, as is morale. Easy, peasie (is that a word?). I can't go into detail here. I have a copyright under review. Just kidding. Sort of. No honestly. I don’t.
- No hidden units. God how I hate hidden units. Hidden units are the gaming equivalent of Rebecca Black’s music.
- Lots of pulse lasers. I might not even include rules for them, but they’ll be on the cover art.
- Nothing
in
- A stress on simplification. If in doubt, leave it out. Make a game that people play.
- Lots of interesting people to meet. Any squad-level game I design will always have flexible rules that allow individuals to dominate the battlefield. Just like they do in real life.
- A closing paragraph that pleads with our politicians to bring our troops home. All of them. To stop wasting their lives in petty wars why we argue about the stupid economy. Just saying.
Anyway, those are my ideas. What do you folks think?
Comments
2. I love MBT. Great game. I also like the starter kit method that brings you up to speed on a system slowly so I can go along with the no vehicles right away.
3. I don't like no levels. What we need is an easy way to calculate LOS. I think you could do this with some numbers on the board indicating level and a little adding and subtracting. Also, as a Packers fan I would never talk about Josh McNown.
4. I would agree to a certain extent. I don't like dice rolling to determine hits. While there is some chance in firing at someone there is more skill to it. Would you rather have an Afgan Farmer shooting at you from 500 meters or a US Marine? Once again I say no dice just some math.
5. I like hidden units. Makes it more real.
6. I don't like lasers in a non laser game.
7. Agree
8. Agree
9. Part of what made Ambush and B17 fun what the attachment you had to your guys. +100 to what you say here.
10. I very much agree with this.