Tabletop XCOM?

>>54123062
I've always found Soldiers quite a bit like X-Com in terms of how the tactical combat focused around lines of sight and cover. But it doesn't really mix tech levels, it's all WW2 stuff.

>>54123062
RECON is what I would use and reskin the aliens weapons as dirty, subhuman commie weapons.

Savage Worlds Showdown

>>54123062
Try Double Tap by One Page Wargaming. It's so simple that you can easily reskin/theme it. Most of the units will have only one wound but again, you can easily work around that. Double Tap has the added bonus of being fun as fuck.

Optionally if you don't mind way more complexity, Infinity is what Double Tap is based on.

>>54123093
Any publisher information? I can't find the specific game you're talking about with that generic of a name.

>>54123174
Does this actually support wargame play? It seems like it's an actual RPG. I envisioned players controlling multiple units in a squad.

>>54123062
Warzone: Resurrection's system would be a good fit, I think. It's a platoon based wargame, but it's granular enough to handle the small, elite scale of XCOM quite handily. The Stalk deployment mechanic alone would be good to represent the fog of war for the alien forces. Perhaps give it a look? The rules are a free download from the prodos website.

>>54124135
This one

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/7255/soldiers-man-man-combat-world-war-ii

Infinity is what jumps out to me. The order system isn't how XCOM works (XCOM gives one activation per soldier, Infinity does the same for the most part but you don't have to spend those activation on each soldier, it's like an order pool). But in terms of complexity of actions and abilities and squad-level skirmish I think Infinity is very in line with what you'd expect from XCOM. The Combined Army (the alien bad guy faction) has a nice mix of aliens too.

>>54123062
You could try the X-COM: Tactical game

GURPS: Monster Hunters series, specifically the Applied Xenology book.

>>54124568
I've considered Infinity. Would it break the game to give every unit (or most units) multiple wounds like certain hero units have? As long as the number of units stays low (I'm thinking 6-10 max for human side) it shouldn't bog it down too much. I'm assuming there's also support for asymmetrical scenarios and not just point-based matches.

>>54125088
>I've considered Infinity. Would it break the game to give every unit (or most units) multiple wounds like certain hero units have?
Almost all heavy infantry (which typically means power armor) and some other units have multiple wounds in Infinity. Some units also have pseudo-wounds from Valor skills (usually either the ability to keep going while you still have orders to spend, or a complete second wound that only applies under certain circumstances).

You should be able to put together units that have multiple wounds as standard, sure. There isn't really support for asymmetrical scenarios in the game, beyond the campaigns/missions published and the points limits.

>>54123062
Shadowrun works well enough to run an XCOM 2 campaign.

>>54126750
I've read through the core SR book in the past but I've never played it. How fast is it in play, some of the combat minutia seemed a bit clunky.

File: Strike! cover.pdf (429KB, 1x1px) Image search: [Google]

429KB, 1x1px

Strike! was made for this.

>>54123062
Just GURPs it nigga

>>54129987
>left side
>disadvantage to hitting yellow
>when virtually all of what we can see of the left side of yellow has absolutely perfect LOS on yellow
The fuck is this shit.

>>54130003
Gurps is actually pretty fantastic for this sort of thing. I ran a pseudo-XCOM game with tactical shootining, black ops for 3e, and some of the enemies from monster hunter

>>54130023
The pic isn't great, but those tubes cover that yellow dragon things left side. He's huddling in an "L" shaped cover.

>>54130003
>>54130059
Savage worlds should work as well, The system itself is really nice.

>>54130023
You know this is EXACTLY how it works in XCOM:EU/EW?

Unless you pick that one option where angle between the cover and the shooter affects to-hit ratio.

GURPS works perfectly for Xcom

>>54129987
What's the full name?

Googling for "Strike! board game" or "Strike! miniature game" gives completely unrelated results.

File: Strike! The game of Tactical Combat and Heedless Adventure.pdf (1MB, 1x1px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1x1px

>>54130191
It's actually an RPG.

Strike! The game of Tactical Combat and Heedless Adventure.

You can safely ignore the RP parts though.

>>54130212
Actually, here, have a download https://www.sendspace.com/file/txtl08

>>54123062
>What would be the best way to replicate the tactical battles of XCOM?
Old X-Com: GURPS with High-Tech/Ultra-Tech for gear and rules pertaining to gear, Tactical Shooting for tactical operators operating tactically, and baddies from the Monster Hunters series.

New X-Com: Savage Worlds or Strike!.

Tbh I'm surprised they haven't made an official tabletop version yet.