New Forum Game: Tank Warfare?

[Crumb]

:tank:

I am thinking that perhaps a forum game of tank warfare would be fun. Each player controls a tank and they maneuver around on a hex map (with obstacles) and try to destroy each other individually or in teams. I think teams would be more interesting. :yup:

I would be willing to run a few games to get the rules and stuff straightened out and would like some input on the ideas that I have at this point. :chin: If anyone is interested please jump in, because games aren't much fun to play by oneself. (Not these kinds of games anyways.)

Here's what I think would be the necessary characteristics of the tanks:

Damage Capacity Damage before destruction. Destroyed at 0 or below.
Speed Number of moves per turn.
Maneuverability Number of turns in a space without a forward move.
Main Weapon
MW Speed amount of turn per turn
MW Range MN Closest tank that can be hit
MW Range MX farthest tank that can be hit
MW Damage Damage done on hit
MW Accuracy XX% -Y/rng; Percentage chance that a shot is a hit. Minus Y percent per space of range to target tank.

There would be a bit on randomness in that accuracy method. I would rather get rid of the randomness, but I am uncertain how to do it otherwise allowing for reasonable chances of missing & hitting.

The turns would be a move phase, then a map of tank locations followed by a firing phase, and results of firing. Moves and shots would be PMed to the GM who would produce a public map.

I has a few other ideas, but I'll see if there is any interest before blathering on.

:tank:

[Legs]

Can girls play?

[Crumb]

:giggles: Of course! :)

Maybe, my best bet is just to recruit a few players and see how things go. :shrug:

Would you want to play, Legsy?

[Legs]

Well since I have no poker to play :brooding: why not?

Tank you, tank you very much
:elvis:

[Crumb]

:chuckle: Well I don't know that it would start until I am kicked out of that game, too.

[Nightson]

Me and friends play a tank game (with many tanks) based on World War II and here's how our system works.

Tanks posses the following stats: Size, Gun, Front Armor, Side Armor, and Rear Armor, and Speed.

Size determined the starting value of how difficult you were to hit. Bigger size meant easier to hit and slower but heavier guns and heavier armor. All the rest are fairly self explanatory.

The way combat worked, each attack consisted of a roll to hit and a roll to damage. Rolling was done with two normal (six sided) dice. The number needed to hit was determined by taking the size of the target and then applying modifiers for things like cover, movement, and range. Determining damage was a straightforward comparison of the gun value of the attacker plus dice roll to the armor value of the target. A result lower then the armor value does nothing, an exact match damages the target, and a higher result destroys the target.

As an example, a tank with a gun value of 20 fires at another tank. The target is medium sized, didn't move during the movement phase and has slight cover. This yields a number around 6-7 that you need to roll in order to hit, and for our purposes we'll assume you make it. Smaller tanks, fast movement, or high ranges can lead to much higher numbers. You determine whether the shot is a front, side, or rear shot. Assuming the shot is a front shot and the tank has a front armor value of 26, a result of 2-5 on the dice would do nothing, a result of 6 would damage the target and 7-12 would destroy the target.

That's the core of the system, it's pretty fun.

[Nightson]

I made charts for rules because I'm a dork.

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a168/Night_son/Tank%20Stuff/Tank1.jpg

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a168/Night_son/Tank%20Stuff/Tank2.jpg

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a168/Night_son/Tank%20Stuff/Tank3.jpg

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a168/Night_son/Tank%20Stuff/Tank4.jpg

Basically each player would have a certain amount of points they could use to buy tanks and that would make up their army. Attacking and damaging both become more difficult at longer ranges. There's rules for cover, damaging and moving and other things that I came up with too but didn't post for brevity's sake.

[Crumb]

Oh tables are good. :unnod:

I was thinking of advancing to a similar point system. :) But I wanted to start simple (giving everyone the same tank with limited options).

So how did you determine cover/concealment etc? I was thinking of simplifying that too and having different edges on the map not allow shooting or driving or both, so that they could be used strategically.

I want to minimize the randomness involved, although I do like having different armor in different directions. My thought is that armor could just be a reduction in damage from the gun and there is only one roll to hit. So armor is like 5% or 20% and if hit from that side damage from the shot is reduced by that percentage. Then there is only one roll for a hit.

Are you interested in being a test player? :)

[MonCapitan2002]

The concept sounds interesting. How well would it work on a forum, though? I assume the GM would not participate as a player.

[Crumb]

GM would not participate as a player.

Gm would maintain a game map with the tank positions. There would be a move phase where the map would be updated with new tank position and then a shoot phase where the players PM their targets to the GM and he would resolve the shots.

I think that would work.

[MonCapitan2002]

Would you be posting images with all the player positions? If you choose to play with teams how long would players have between phases to communicate with their teammates? Would PM's be permitted during this phase?

The reason I ask about images is because I think better visually and it would be easier to plot out moves and strategise with a map showing positions of all the players on the grid as opposed to having a written description of all the player positions.

[beyelzu]

i would want to play

[Crumb]

Yes, I would be providing a map after every move phase. PMs would always be allowed.

Cool, bey.

Please let me know if you want to play by adding your name to the list:
1. Legs
2. beyelzu
3.
4.

I would like to have at least 4 players; 2 teams of 2.

[Crumb]

Oh, another thing I am really not sure about is how big to make the map. Or perhaps put another way, how many turns should it take for an average tank to drive across the map?

Also, for extras I was thinking mine laying, mine detection, targeting computer, extra armor, any other ideas?

[Nightson]

Oh tables are good. :unnod:

I was thinking of advancing to a similar point system. :) But I wanted to start simple (giving everyone the same tank with limited options).

So how did you determine cover/concealment etc? I was thinking of simplifying that too and having different edges on the map not allow shooting or driving or both, so that they could be used strategically.

I want to minimize the randomness involved, although I do like having different armor in different directions. My thought is that armor could just be a reduction in damage from the gun and there is only one roll to hit. So armor is like 5% or 20% and if hit from that side damage from the shot is reduced by that percentage. Then there is only one roll for a hit.

Are you interested in being a test player? :)

It seems pretty easy to build tanks, I plan to make a bunch of archetype tanks to make it even easier for people to make an army.

Light cover gives -1 to hit, this can me lightly packed trees or things like a smoking tank between the attacker and target
Heavy cover gives -2 to hit, this would be stuff like bushlines or hiding behind rocks
Hulldown is essentially digging a hole for the tank, the tank needs to stay stationary in the place they started out in order to receive the benefits but it gives -3 to hit

I'm much more of a fan of a two roll system, when you have any randomness in a game, if you attempt to limit it to a small amount you tend to actually magnify the effect because with fewer rolls good or bad streaks are magnified.

I'm always up for a game.

[Nightson]

Oh, another thing I am really not sure about is how big to make the map. Or perhaps put another way, how many turns should it take for an average tank to drive across the map?

Also, for extras I was thinking mine laying, mine detection, targeting computer, extra armor, any other ideas?

In general a fast tank should be able to get across the map in about three turns for a game with multiple tanks. I have no idea how big a map should be for a single tank game.


Mine laying really slows games down I would strongly advise against it. The other things would probably be fine.

[Crumb]

It seems pretty easy to build tanks, I plan to make a bunch of archetype tanks to make it even easier for people to make an army.
Sure and I will try that next game.This game it is same tank with a single extra for customization.

I'll stick with the single roll and see what happens. it also makes it less work for me. :)

So if you are in MonCap we will have enough for a trial version. :pleased:
1. Legs
2. beyelzu
3. Nightson
4.

I'll come up with an initial version of the rules and game map.

[Crumb]

Oh, another thing I am really not sure about is how big to make the map. Or perhaps put another way, how many turns should it take for an average tank to drive across the map?

Also, for extras I was thinking mine laying, mine detection, targeting computer, extra armor, any other ideas?

In general a fast tank should be able to get across the map in about three turns for a game with multiple tanks. I have no idea how big a map should be for a single tank game.


Mine laying really slows games down I would strongly advise against it. The other things would probably be fine.
In what way would mine laying slow the game down. I figure that a tank that could lay mines would put the instructions in during the move phase and any tank that later enters that space would detonate the mine. Where's the slow down?

[Nightson]

Oh, another thing I am really not sure about is how big to make the map. Or perhaps put another way, how many turns should it take for an average tank to drive across the map?

Also, for extras I was thinking mine laying, mine detection, targeting computer, extra armor, any other ideas?

In general a fast tank should be able to get across the map in about three turns for a game with multiple tanks. I have no idea how big a map should be for a single tank game.


Mine laying really slows games down I would strongly advise against it. The other things would probably be fine.
In what way would mine laying slow the game down. I figure that a tank that could lay mines would put the instructions in during the move phase and any tank that later enters that space would detonate the mine. Where's the slow down?

The slow down comes from people trying to avoid mines :P People will pretty much never have the ability to detect mines because it's worthless if somebody doesn't take the ability to lay mines. After the first mine goes off, people tend to turtle up to avoid running into more mines they can't detect. Trust as someone who has played tank games for over three years, mines slow games down and make it less fun.

[Crumb]

Hmm... Well maybe. I guess I can leave mines out.

[Crumb]

Ok, I decided for the first game you can have one of three tanks. Since this is the first time I am not sure that these tanks are well balanced. Let me know if you think one might be overly dominant or useless.

{colsp=4}Tank Stats
Type|A|B|C
Speed|5|8|4
Damage Capacity|100|100|100
Front Armor|10%|20%|10%
Side Armor|10%|5%|5%
Rear Armor|10%|0%|5%
Gun Range|6|5|7
Gun Accuracy|90% -1/r|95% -2/r|90%-2/r
Gun Damage|40|30|50

[Nightson]

Number of shots it takes A&C to destroy a tank: 3
Number of shots it takes B to destroy a tank: 4

Armor is basically worthless, it only makes a difference in three scenarios out of 27 possible scenarios, that of an A tank firing at a B tank from the front, a B tank firing at a B tank from the front, and a C tank firing at a B tank from the rear. And the last one is probably not really applicable because you'd have to shoot it in the rear two turns in a row.

Basically it's a game of who shoots first with B always losing no matter who fires first (unless it happens to be an A tank firing from the front, in which case it's whoever fired first)

If you miss once it means you've lost. Unless you're fighting somebody who picked a B because then you'll still blow it up as long as you shot first.

In conclusion, it needs some definite revision.

[Crumb]

So you don't think speed (& oops I forgot the maneuverability row) or range is relevant?

Are you thinking that accuracy is too high? I can see how that would be an issue, if you are almost guaranteed to hit then the freak miss would decide the match. So I should probably increase the range modifier that would increase the effect of range and speed on the game, and drop armor altogether or increase the differences in armor.

[Crumb]

Ok, I have changed it up a bit. Armor is better. Accuracy is lower, and range makes a bigger difference.

{colsp=4}Tank Stats
Type|A|B|C
Speed|5|8|4
Maneuverability|2|3|2
Damage Capacity|100|100|100
Front Armor|30%|30%|30%
Side Armor|15%|10%|15%
Rear Armor|30%|10%|5%
Gun Range|6|5|7
Gun Accuracy|80% -5/r|90% -5/r|80%-5/r
Gun Damage|40|30|50

[Nightson]

I'm still not getting your formula for range, they way it's spelled out now accuracy will increase as range increases, that doesn't make any sense and can't be what I mean so either I'm failing at understanding or you have something written wrong.

[Crumb]

The way it is written now accuracy decreases by 5% for every space between shooter and target.

[California Tanker]

So you don't think speed (& oops I forgot the maneuverability row) or range is relevant?

I can't play, because if I lose, I'd never live it down.

However, the mobility vs armour thing has been hashed out over the last few decades in real life. After WWII, there were three schools of thought. One, followed by the Germans and French (Leopard, AMX-30), was that tanks should be quite light, but very fast. Speed is life, and with its speed it would be hard to hit on the battlefield. One, followed by the British, was 'to hell with speed, we're just going to sit here on this hill with a stonking big gun and a stupid amount of armour' (Chieftain). And the last, followed by the Americans (M60) and Russians (T-62), was to have a bit of a blend which, in hindsight, turned out to be the worst of the lot as guns developed: Not quite fast enough to get to where it needs to go without being hit, and not quite tough enough to deal with the punishment being thrown at it.

In the end, armour has taken precedence, with tanks going as fast as the power packs can get them to go, as opposed to trying to get a tank to go as fast as a set speed, and putting whatever armour you can on it and still go that fast. In the final analysis, no matter how fast you are, a bullet or missile is faster.

NTM

[Nightson]

Crunched the numbers, B actually got even worse and C got better. You broke the game even more :P.

C can kill anything in three shots, irregardless of what the other tank is or whether it's shooting at the side or the rear.

B takes five shots to kill either from the front and five shots to kill A from the rear as well. A at the side and C from the rear and side takes four turns. Of course even if B gets the initial rear or side shot if they turn to face him he goes back to five turns.

A takes four turns to kill C or B from the front and three turns if attacking form the rear or side, of course that's only if the tank stays with it's sides exposed, if it turns back to the front then A takes four turns still.


Range is important, but I didn't have to take it into consideration because you gave the best range to the already most powerful tank. Speed is important in two ways, either to reach some sort of mission objectives or to try and get side or rear shots on people. The problem is that there aren't mission objectives so far as I know and getting a rear or side shot isn't actually important.

Miss chance is still broken. Each person will make four rolls on average. A single bad roll will probably sink you, two will almost definitely kill you.

Basically it's the problem I talked about earlier, by attempting to minimize randomness it becomes to most powerful thing in the game. If you put randomness in the game then it needs to have enough randomness that it can absorb small streaks by a player. I don't think it's really possible to do in a single tank game, so I'd abolish it entirely. I developed a single tank system last night, I'll post it as soon as I write it up.

Edit:
The way it is written now accuracy decreases by 5% for every space between shooter and target. Ah haha, you meant / to be per and I read it as dividing five byt he range, everything makes sense now.

[Crumb]

I increased the range penalty to make speed more important. I increased the difference in armor to make hitting from different sides more important. I think I am thinking about things much differently than you are.

[Crumb]

So you don't think speed (& oops I forgot the maneuverability row) or range is relevant?

I can't play, because if I lose, I'd never live it down.

However, the mobility vs armour thing has been hashed out over the last few decades in real life. After WWII, there were three schools of thought. One, followed by the Germans and French (Leopard, AMX-30), was that tanks should be quite light, but very fast. Speed is life, and with its speed it would be hard to hit on the battlefield. One, followed by the British, was 'to hell with speed, we're just going to sit here on this hill with a stonking big gun and a stupid amount of armour' (Chieftain). And the last, followed by the Americans (M60) and Russians (T-62), was to have a bit of a blend which, in hindsight, turned out to be the worst of the lot as guns developed: Not quite fast enough to get to where it needs to go without being hit, and not quite tough enough to deal with the punishment being thrown at it.

In the end, armour has taken precedence, with tanks going as fast as the power packs can get them to go, as opposed to trying to get a tank to go as fast as a set speed, and putting whatever armour you can on it and still go that fast. In the final analysis, no matter how fast you are, a bullet or missile is faster.

NTM
Hey CT, I thought about you when I was thinking of this, but i didn't know if you would be interested. I wouldn't think you would be expected to win considering that these aren't real tanks.

I wanted part of the game to be the lighter swifter tank, the middle of the road tank, and the big lumbering hulk, but as I try and balance things it is difficult to determine what all of those things are worth. It might be that speed won't make much of a difference, especially at the small differences that I made.

[Nightson]

I increased the range penalty to make speed more important.

Both tanks will be shooting at each other at the same range in a movement phase/shooting phase set up. And it still doesn't make a difference because even if B scores an extra hit because of his better range he's still not going to be able to kill C.

I increased the difference in armor to make hitting from different sides more important.

The problem is that it isn't important. For C, it doesn't matter whether it hits the front, side or rear because it'll rip through them just as fast, and for A and B it doesn't matter because the extra damage from a side or rear shot isn't enough to kill the tank any faster as soon as it turns to face them.

Here's some of the number crunching I did with both the new stats and the old stats.
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a168/Night_son/Tank%20Stuff/Tankmath.jpg

[Crumb]

Oh and Nightson I wanted to revisit the multiple die rolls. having multiple rolls vs. one roll is irrelevant. All it does is lower the probability of success. (If I have 2 50/50 success rolls it is equivalent to a 25/75 success roll, but just with more work.)

If you think the accuracy should be lower so that there is a greater chance of missing, which might not be a bad idea. Then it is a piece of cake to decrease the percentage. Adding an extra roll isn't really necessary though.

[Crumb]

I increased the range penalty to make speed more important.

Both tanks will be shooting at each other at the same range in a movement phase/shooting phase set up. And it still doesn't make a difference because even if B scores an extra hit because of his better range he's still not going to be able to kill C.

I increased the difference in armor to make hitting from different sides more important.

The problem is that it isn't important. For C, it doesn't matter whether it hits the front, side or rear because it'll rip through them just as fast, and for A and B it doesn't matter because the extra damage from a side or rear shot isn't enough to kill the tank any faster as soon as it turns to face them.

Here's some of the number crunching I did with both the new stats and the old stats.
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a168/Night_son/Tank%20Stuff/Tankmath.jpg

So the armor difference and speed difference needs to be bigger.

[Nightson]

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a168/Night_son/Tank%20Stuff/Newtanks.jpg

This is what I came up with last night. It still needs tweaking (I want to increase HP slightly, a little to easy to die right now) but it's fairly balanced I think. I went with an abilities system which I don't know how that will go over with people but it was the only way I could figure out how to make the tanks feel really distinctive and give some exciting tactical options.

Some of the mechanics aren't directly referenced, Sideshots deal X1.5 damage and rear shots deal x2 damage. I got ready of rolls to hit for the most part, tanks just have a max range in which they hit what they shoot at. The only exception I was thinking of making was when there's cover or something with would give a 20% miss chance. High ground would give something like increased range at the price of increased visibility. And I need to make rules for visibility because it's important.

[Crumb]

Oh, I definitely like some of the abilities you have there; extra shot, stealth, etc. Instead of having those as part of the package though, I thin kit would be better to have three basic tank types with just the stats and then have the player choose two abilities from a pool to customize their tank. (That being just short of a point system for customization.)

Multiplying damage for side and rear shots sounds simpler as well. The cover and high ground stuff sounds too complicated though. At least for how I was thinking of doing things.

[Nightson]

Oh and Nightson I wanted to revisit the multiple die rolls. having multiple rolls vs. one roll is irrelevant. All it does is lower the probability of success. (If I have 2 50/50 success rolls it is equivalent to a 25/75 success roll, but just with more work.)

If you think the accuracy should be lower so that there is a greater chance of missing, which might not be a bad idea. Then it is a piece of cake to decrease the percentage. Adding an extra roll isn't really necessary though.

Adding an extra roll wouldn't fix anything, the length of combat isn't long enough to absorb streaks and I don't think it can be in a single tank game.

During the average game there will be an average of twelve rolls total with each player rolling four times on average. You can come in blazing from your enemies rear and then you miss, your enemy turns around and doesn't miss and you lose. In a bigger game it's okay because you have many tanks and given the large number of fights you'll repay him with your own lucky streak on average. But in a single tank there is no average because there aren't enough shots being fired to make a large enough sample for an average to emerge, streaks will dominate.

Some people may be fine with this because other people play differently the me which I freely acknowledge, I'm not terribly fond of games in which I feel randomness plays too big a role (like Risk, fuck Risk).

[Crumb]

I don't want randomness to play too big a roll. I think eliminating it entirely would be ok if i always hit if you can reach'em will still make for more than a whoever shoots first/assured mutual destruction.

If you want me to understand all of that stuff you wrote up you will have to translate it into keystrokes. :D

[Nightson]

Oh, I definitely like some of the abilities you have there; extra shot, stealth, etc. Instead of having those as part of the package though, I thin kit would be better to have three basic tank types with just the stats and then have the player choose two abilities from a pool to customize their tank. (That being just short of a point system for customization.)


Ideally I'd like to let each tank have a pool of abilities to pick from, I was just too lazy to come up with more then three :P

They need to be three separate pools though for balance reasons. The Striker and the Defender are balanced in that when they go toe to toe without abilities it's even. But it's pretty much impossible to balance the controller because he's the average. Either he's strong enough that he can take out both other tanks or he's weaker and can't take out either. So to balance the controller we need to make it so he can't take either in a straight fight without abilities but can gain enough of an edge in order to win through using his abilities well.

Ideally they'll all be roughly balanced against each other and feel distinctive when playing them.

[Nightson]

I don't want randomness to play too big a roll. I think eliminating it entirely would be ok if i always hit if you can reach'em will still make for more than a whoever shoots first/assured mutual destruction.

If you want me to understand all of that stuff you wrote up you will have to translate it into keystrokes. :D

*grumble* but scanning it was so much easier...

I'll only type it out because I'm feeling productive.

[Crumb]

Well write down the abilities that you have to I can understand them and maybe I can come up with some more. :)

[Nightson]

Striker

The Striker is the strongest offensive tank, it has a powerful gun and several abilities that make it shoot further or hit harder. This offensive power comes at a cost though, the Striker has the lowest health and a very limited ability to repair itself.

HP: 100
Damage: 100
Speed: 10
Nanobots: 2

Striker abilities should emphasize damage or mobility.

Sample abilities:

Double Tap – Once per battle you can fire twice during the shooting phase
Burst of Speed – You can use Burst of Speed to travel at three times your normal movement rate, this ability recharges three rounds after it's use.
Hail Mary – Once per battle you may attack at twice your
normal range.


Defender

The Defender is the toughest of the tanks. Defenders don't survive by dealing large amounts of damage, they survive by weathering enemy fire long enough to destroy the other tank, the have the highest health and they greatest ability to repair themselves. This defensive ability comes at the cost of offensive power.

HP: 500
Damage: 20
Speed: 10
Nanobots: 6

Defender abilities should emphasize surviving hits or counters to hit-and-run attacks

Sample abilities:

Watch You Six – Once per battle negate a rear or side shot.
Titanium Hull – Once per battle reduce all damage done to you during one shooting phase by half
The Best Defense... - Once per battle [?] charge an enemy withing 15 spaces, make an extra attack and immobilize the enemy for the next movement phase



Controller

Unlike either the Striker or the Defender, the Controller does not posses overly impressive offensive or defensive power. The strength of the Controller comes from using his abilities to set up situations to his advantage in order to achieve victory.

HP: 200
Damage: 40
Speed: 10
Nanobots: 4

Controller abilities are the most varied, they can consist of information gathering powers, powers that negatively effect enemies, or just about anything except directly increasing a Controller's offensive or defensive power. Controller abilities are almost always usable more then once per battle.

Sample abilities:

Lockdown – Immobilizes enemy for the next movement phase, this ability recharges after three rounds
Satellite Feed – Reveals a 10x10 section of the battlefield to the controller, an enemy tanks currently in the area or any tanks that passed through during the movement phase are visible, this ability recharges after two rounds
Stealth Technology – The controller may become invisible, while invisible the Controller can neither move nor shoot without breaking the invisibility, this ability recharges after three rounds of visibility



Actions are activated during the shooting phase, you can use an action in conjunction with firing.

Nanobots heal 50 HP per application and are activated the same way that other actions are except that you cannot use them while firing or while being fired upon. You can use a number of nanobots up to the number of charges you have left.

[Crumb]

Satellite Feed – Reveals a 10x10 section of the battlefield to the controller, an enemy tanks currently in the area or any tanks that passed through during the movement phase are visible, this ability recharges after two rounds
I think this exposes a fundamental difference in our visions of the game. My thought was that the map would be public and tank positions would be known by everyone. Are you thinking that maps would be private? In which case the whole game would essentially be in private.

[California Tanker]

Another possibility is to have penetration ability decrease with distance as well as accuracy. This would also be realistic, not that realism is really a factor here.

NTM

[Crumb]

Essentially that would be a decrease in damage, right?

[Nightson]

Satellite Feed – Reveals a 10x10 section of the battlefield to the controller, an enemy tanks currently in the area or any tanks that passed through during the movement phase are visible, this ability recharges after two rounds
I think this exposes a fundamental difference in our visions of the game. My thought was that the map would be public and tank positions would be known by everyone. Are you thinking that maps would be private? In which case the whole game would essentially be in private.

The map would be public of course, but I can't see making tank positions public making for a very interesting game. If you always know where the other guy is it kind of takes the fun out of it and really limits the tactical aspects.

Edit: When a tank become visible then it's put on the visible to all game map. Preferably we'd be playing with two teams of two so there wouldn't be any issues with a third party being able to see a battle between two others

[Crumb]

Hmm... I get it now. You have this figured out much better than I. Sounds like the map I was planning to use is not big enough though.

This is what I was thinking of using.

http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e289/crumb42/BaseMap2.png

[Crumb]

And these for tanks.

http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e289/crumb42/TankYellow4.png http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e289/crumb42/TankBlue4.png

[Nightson]

Distance is kind of mutable, just reducing all the speeds and ranges, adding some objects like rocks and hill/valleys and that map could work well.

[Crumb]

Cool. I wanted to add objects, but was unable to find anything that looked right. I'm not really sure how to handle elevation. It wasn't really part of my original conception.