Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Vytau

  1. YIKES! Glad I joined this thread, because I've been doing indirect fire wrong (making separate strike point rolls for each weapon system). In that case then, the numbers don't actually change too much: 16% of your shots (albeit in this case full volleys of four shots) still directly hit their target, 33% will still be in "splash" range, and the rest will all plop merrily into your enemy's ranks. As you point out, it's a 66% chance for one direct hit, and, as the song says, 2 out of 3 ain't bad! It seems you could still fire all 16 individually, that is, you could still designate 16 unique strike points...but as I re-read the rules, it seems like all shots would be going totally wild since there's a -1 to-hit penalty for every target after the first. But then, if what Cavboss said in the other thread is true, and 10+ always hits, hell, have at it right?
  2. The best way to make Tiamats hit anything is to field lots of Tiamats! Ignore any modifiers for now and just assume you need to roll 10+ to hit your target point. You have a fire support unit of four Tiamats - here's what happens: 1) All four Tiamatas fire all four of their respective R20s at the same strike point for a grand total of 16 shots. 2) Roughly 16% of your shots hit, which means three direct hits. 3) Of your 12 misses, 33% (4 shots) only drift 3" or less, meaning an additional 4 shots "splashed" your strike point. So under this mathematically ideal situation, you've slapped your opponents force with seven 7/7 shots...but that's not all! Those 9 misses have to go *somewhere* and so long as you're not firing too close to your own team, they're either going to explode harmlessly, or land right on top of some poor feckless foe that didn't even know he needed to take cover. So on the one hand, you can game the electronics to try to bring strike point target down, but on the other hand, you can also just liberally pepper the board with rockets until something dies! (EDIT: I didn't coffee hard enough, so I mathed bad).
  3. Agreed - we haven't done much with grenades at our table, but we can already see that we probably won't play with them as-written.
  4. Oh man, this is fun! Okay, here are some of mine: Just to clarify what you're looking at down below, these are plastic Battletech minis from the old core and City Tech boxed sets. I used, I kid you not, glossy Testors model paints. You do not see highlighting on these models; you see light reflecting off a glossy surface. And what have we learned since then? Well, here is my 40k Ork Warboss - I don't have it anymore since I got out of 40k and sold off all my stuff, but while I had it, it looked like this: My internet is absolutely dogged out right now, so it's taking me forever to find good pics, but I think this before-and-after exemplifies what I can do now and how I started out!
  5. May I suggest that rather than using up dead trees, you try using the Cav Force Manager? It's available for dowload, for free, from the Talon Games website! You can play around with building forces (and checking their legality) to your heart's content!
  6. Hi, Salem - welcome to CAV! I'll try to answer your questions as best I can, though no doubt quite a few other players will chime in soon. We're friendly like that! Anyway, first things first: Unit composition! You could, technically, build legal units with what you have - it would just count as a "Specialist Squad," which is a unique type of primary squad that can include pretty much any model type in limited numbers. In both cases, you can't build a squad using all four CAVs: while a specialist squad can include 4 models, the "bulky" Thunderbird and Emperor both count as 2 models each. Nevertheless, a good way to get some games in just using what you have would be to build a specialist squad for each side and then skirmishing. That's a couple good sessions right there as you get a feel for what you like in a game of CAV. Now then: you asked specifically about mixing units in a squad - you can mix CAVs and Fighting Vehicles as much as you like, but normally flight squadrons are only aircraft, and infantry squads are only infantry. This can be complicated a bit by the availability of transports, but that's academic for you at this point. The short answer to your question is that yes, you can mix CAVs, Tanks, and AFVs in a unit, but not aircraft. Lastly, as for what you should buy - in CAV there are very few "weak" units. In other games, like Battletech, you wind up with some just absolute stinkers like the 3025 Charger*, but in CAV, pretty much any unit you buy can do the job it is designed for. In my experience, whatever you pick can be made to work, so buy the models you like! From a more practical standpoint though, focus on building Attack squads - they are the most versatile all-around of the four types of primary squads (attack, infantry, mechanized infantry, and specialist). For the Rach, it is well understood that everyone needs more dictators. The Terrans are spoiled for choice - you mention the Falcon by name, and that's an excellent fast-moving sniper. I haven't taken the Nightshade out yet personally, but I'm not sure if you'll like it right now since it doesn't sound like you're playing with any soft targets (infantry and aircraft). Sorry for going on at length - hopefully this is helpful, and again, welcome to CAV! - V *True to its name, this mech -is- aces at a charging attack...but I digress.
  7. I've got six on the way...in May of 2017!
  8. I finally have six fighting CAV armies - some more fight-y than others. Some have enough models with enough variety to meet diverse challenges, and some are just barely legal if you squint right. Case in point? Here's my newly painted Ritterlich army! Notice a complete lack of infantry, aircraft, fighting vehicles, transports, and for that matter, primary squads.* But recon and artillery? Got that *covered*! Anyway, here's a glimpse of my boys in blue. They won't see much growth until next year when CAV KS II gets here, but they will see play because, hey, rhinos right? * As-is, I could only build two legal attack squads, both of which revolve around a rhino and a cataphract with either a recon model or a fire support model to get it up to a full squad of 4. Truth be told, I'm honestly thinking I'll re-purpose some of these cougars as Cougar IIs - something between a Cougar and a Jaguar, just for the sake of variety.
  9. I'll second what Vil-hatarn said about terrain density. If you make a realistically dense urban board, get ready for a long game. I'm attaching pics of one of my urban boards to give you some idea, but long story short: this game did *not* get finished. This is raw guesswork,but if you want to play in a dense urban setting, there are a few things which might help: Keep units light and fast. That big Godzilla CAV marching down Main street will be a slow, clumsy road block in my experience. Like, sure you can spearhead with a Rhino or Ogre, but this isn't Gundam: tanks can take down walkers, and if you march your big huge stompy super heavy into the waiting guns of, say, two heavy MAC tanks and their supporting PBG CAV buddy, you're just constipating your own line of ingress. Consider cheating on the building rules so that they're easier to raze to rubble, which does not block line-of-sight. Use units which move easily through cities, like infantry and wheeled vehicles, AND which don't block line-of-sight for the taller units behind them. As for density guidelines, I've heard rules like "cover one quarter of your board" before, but that's a rule of thumb at best. On a 6' x 4' table, 72 square inches of LOS-blocking buildings plays way, way differently than 72 square inches of merely to-hit-penalizing light woods. The two things I try to remember when building a board: variety is the spice of life (or in this case, a fiery explosive death), and at no point should anyone's models ever feel truly safe. Here's an urban board - it looked pretty good, but was way too dense, especially since we were just sort of learning the rules at that time. The buildings are made from electrical boxes, the roads are polystyrene sheet, the model cars are N-scale railroad supplies. Trees are Woodland Scenics. Hills are sheet insulation, painted and flocked. Here's a more natural board - it's still pretty dense, but only the hills and the few buildings on-board actually block LOS.
  10. This has been awesome, and I am thrilled with the outcome. I've been out for the last 48 hours and haven't been internetting, but I was super excited to get home, check my email, and see that this kickstarter was such an enormous success! I still have to straighten out my pledge and all, but for now: super happy, and really looking forward to spring / summer of 2017 (I just may have all my current CAV models and some of my Bones II and III stuff painted by then)!
  11. That's a really interesting question - one of the underlying conceits of CAV is that the technology works, as opposed to a world like Battletech in which we are to understand that the technology is held together with duct tape and toaster parts, or a world like 40k in which machines literally run on hopes and prayers. CAVs and a lot of other machines are mobilized via bellar joints, essentially a magnetic joint which all but eliminates friction. This means less heat from grinding gears and the like, though that may be offset through increased power consumption by the joint itself (though perhaps this is balanced out since the machines themselves no longer need to overcome friction inertia when they move...ask a physicist!). The gel breeders which power everything from battleships to blenders in the CAV verse are also extremely efficient, and one of the hallmarks of efficiency is low waste-heat. The biggest sources of heat for vehicles in CAV, then, is probably weapons fire. ACs, RACs, missiles, and machine guns all use propellant which burns very fast and hot. and all the artwork of firing MACs and MRACs depicts some sort of muzzle flash, indicating wasted energy which, naturally, means heat, sound, and light. Wiring and computers would likely warm up as they are electrified (not unlike your laptop). Naturally, flamers are tremendously hot. There would also be some warmth generated whensoever there *was* friction, e.g. treads and feet touching the ground, but not the searing danger-zone heat of a leaking Battletech fusion reactor. The other thing to consider is that CAVs have some pretty amazing visual tech in the form of visually adaptive camouflage - if your CAVs are on an ice world, the reactive camo is going to paint that CAV blue-white unless its operator tells it not to. CAVs may also have surface coolant systems to dampen IR signatures, so maybe your CAVs are kept ice-cold artificially, at least on the outside. Anyway, I think the best thing to do is to run with your own artistic vision and worry about the explanation afterwards - I'm already seeing a well-posed dictator, guns halfway down and looking generally forlorn and dejected with snow piling up on its shoulders and missile launchers, but ready to spring into action and shake off the cold when it's time to fight!
  12. REALLY WANT THOSE TANKS THOUGH!!! I am already thinking about how many lunches I can swap out for Ramen (or nothing!) in order to bump it up a bit more...when we get those Chancellors, Tigers, and Wolverines, I'm having noodles for breakfast too.
  13. Thanks, CAVBOSS & Jeneki - I appreciate it! - V
  14. This general line of questioning came up around our table when we started firing overcharged PBGs at one another and, inevitably, started rolling some "burnouts," that is, overheats (1 on 1D6) and weapon failures (snakeyes). As previously discussed in a different thread, we know that if I go "out of ammo" when firing a Salvo, then the entire weapon system is shut down, e.g. if my Chancellor fires all 4 MACs and runs out of ammo, then all four MACs are disabled. I infer, then, that if I fire those four MACs individually (we call this a "volley"), then if I run out of ammo for one, then I run out of ammo for all. Are the above points true / similar / identical for weapon overheat or failure? That is, if my Tyrant fires all 4 PBGs in a Salvo and overheats, are ALL PBGs shut down for one round? If I burnout (snakeyes) are they ALL disabled? Same goes for firing multiple weapons in a volley - if instead of firing my Ogre's 3 PBGs in a Salvo for improved accuracy, I instead fire a volley, and roll snakeyes on my first shot, does that disable all PBGs or just one? Thanks in advance for the clarification! My group and I are working on a more thorough list of FAQs, but we need still more study of the rules and a few more games under our belts first!
  15. AND ON TOP OF ALL THAT - I forgot to make a big deal out of the Chancellor, one of my hands-down favorite CAVs and probably my favorite main attack CAV for Adon, coming up as a stretch goal! Everything's coming up Milhouse!
  16. Holy jeez - another sixteen models tacked on to the core reward JUST BECAUSE?!? This is awesome!
  17. My close-ups might not prove quite so impressive (these were speed-painted; a necessity when trying to knock out over 200 CAV minis), but I'll try to do a proper photo shoot once I have a little more clean space on the painting desk.
  18. THIS I like - another company, which I'll just shut up about because I don't think this is the place to open that shrieking can of worms, wanted to offer a huge variety of action poses - they wound up making complicated sprues full of tiny pieces that were very difficult to assemble and utterly baffling to new modelers. Good modelers will find ways to convert models no matter how static, and in my experience it's best to have a solid platform from which to start. Plus, if the poses are too action-y, you wind up with an even more pronounced repetitiveness than if all the pieces are just standing still. The Wight comes to mind, as does the Challenger (although for some reason I'm quicker to forgive the challenger - go fig). Anyway, yes, by all means keep them simple and relatively static!
  19. My experience with CAV: SO indicates that manipulating the draw deck is *massive*, so I agree - I think it's an enormous advantage. I'm pleased to say I already have a pretty formidable Ritterlich force which I'd describe as recon + artillery with very little in between. I'm just finally getting around to painting some of them tonight! With that being said, the models I have available coupled with the force org rules make building a viable army tricky for me. If the Cougar were role = attack instead of recon, I'd have it made, but as it stands I'm trying to make it work with two cataphracts, three rhinos, and a ton of Tiamats, Silverbacks, Pumas, Panthers, and Cougars.
  20. -- All it takes is one dedicated player to get it started! Cheap minis helps too! :) The problem seems to be complete lack of interest in table top games like this. But we shall see! That's tough - I'm hoping to run some demos at an upcoming con in November to help generate some interest. It is a bit difficult for us miniature war gamers...it's a unique and challenging hobby, that's for sure. Trying to get people interested in building, painting, organizing, yada yada yada when there are so many other distractions offering instant gratification can be a challenge. Good luck!
  21. The Starhawk V is the first CAV I ever bought, and I still have it - easily one of my favorite models! I'd mention that I've always thought that the missile launcher looked a bit at odds with the rest of the design (same goes for the Talon) and the cockpit is a bit small, but I love it all the same.
  22. Wow - mixed feelings! I think my only misgiving about the decision to 86 metal is that it takes a lot of units out of the game, but as CAVBOSS pointed out, the high price point really did the same thing - I want a well-rounded Templar army, but I'm not paying 200 bucks for it. I do hope to see everything in plastic soon!
  23. The Dervish is amazing - it must be mine! I'm already pestering my group to get their pledges in, and I'll bug them even more when we meet for game night.
  • Create New...