Card Based Activation

[Gunhit]

Has anyone used rules with a card based activation system? I know some of the TFL rules use such a system, and I remember using one for a skirmish game many moons ago.

Was wondering what people thought about such systems if they liked them or not. Are they just a gimick or did they serve some purpose?

Adrian

[lentulus]

They add friction, which is not a bad thing.  The are great for solo gaming, since you can focus on each activation in isolation which may avoid some bias.  They hold up a multi-player, since only one player is acting at a time.

For non-solo, I prefer an activation/friction system like that in Warmaster/ X-commander or black powder, where I can do all my active things in one go but there is still unpredictability -- and which does not hold up multi-player action.

[Gunhit]

Well I am leaning the other way now. Had my fill of IgoYgo systems such as Warmaster/BKC family. Prefer the alternate move system which keeps both players involved in the game. I can see a card activation system denying players the freedom of moving units in a particular order thus adding the required friction and also adding further friction through event cards.

Adrian

[Last Hussar]

I like card activated systems, but I don't feel they should be an automatic choice of rules writers.  They work well with things like IABSM or TW&T, which are down at the section level, recreating the small rushes of groups of men, but I wouldn't discount move/countermove, especially for higher level games.

[Shootmenow]

I've played quite a few games of Field of Battle both WWII and Horse and Musket periods which are card driven systems from the Piquet stable.  Initially I really enjoyed them, probably because they offered something very different to what I was used to, but after a time we found that there were just too many occasions when units stood paralyzed whilst their enemies literally ran rings around them.  This would have been fine had it happened rarely but the occurrence became too frequent and so we moved on and discovered BKG, which I personally find is a good balance between reasonable action and unpredictability.

However, whilst I still play the occasional game of FoB, others I know continue to use them frequently and continue to enjoy them so it is clearly a matter of personal choice rather than a distinct rules fallability.  I would certainly recommend people to try such rules for a few games and see how they get on. 

[Jagger]

How does BKG get around the units frozen too often problem of Piquet systems?

[nikharwood]

What's BKG stand for?

[Leon]

What's BKG stand for?

Big ***King Giant?

[nikharwood]

  You owe me a laptop: this one's now got coffee sprayed all over it 

[Leon]

You and me both, mine's 7 years old now and isn't a big fan of the internet.

[vtsaogames]

Blitz Kreig Commander, Warmaster engine turned to WWII.

[nikharwood]

Nah - that's BKC - not BKG [unless it's a typo...]

[sixsideddice]

I use a card based (action phase) activation sequence in my new Steampunk rules. This works nicely for the Pax Limpopo theme; but that book wont be in the book shops until early next year I`m afraid.

Action cards do add a certain something to a game, especially when playing solo.

Six :-)