Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation


About lurkbeast

  • Rank
  1. Remove infantry markers, fine. They're just infantry. But remove blasted CAVs and vehicles, no way. CAV2 has effectively unlimited range in the scope of a game (unless I'm playing on a kitchen floor or gymnasium) and I don't want to get rid of cover.
  2. Maybe you should type up those scenarios and submit them at ReaperGames so a) you can get points for them and b) we can get reaper to host the files and c) it'll have more distribution that way
  3. lurkbeast

    CAV 2 Beta

    The +1 per Model should probably be the final mechanic. We used cover fire quite a bit on saturday (we were doing lots of infantry scenarios) and the stacked modifiers were already quite significant. If it were +1 per attack I think it would quickly get "silly" powerful.
  4. After another day of testing yesterday we'd have to say that we like the string but if the string must go, we'd rather see it go back to round templates. It was just so much easier than the alternatives. We did play with a round template that at 6 inches away also included everything in a line back to the firing model (which created a cone type area of effect similar to the 40K flame template) and we liked that best.
  5. lurkbeast

    gung ho

    We tested this in our saturday games and it worked just fine. Most of us don't care either way, only one strongly against (his argument was that you don't train to drop within point blank range of the enemy, it may happen, but it still should suck). However, as a style thing, one thing that bugs us in Warlord is the "this special ability functions as the bla special ability" ... we'd rather the special abilities be listed out to help us remember them. I'd rather see "Airborne, Gung Ho" which will help me remember that the Model has both special abilities than "Airborne" and have to rememb
  6. All combat actions of the same type happen together. All Shooting. All Melee. All Casting. However you can mix and match that as you see fit. Your cleric example is legal. The archers splitting up is not since all shooting happens together. However you could shoot. If there were still bad guys left, you could charge in and melee. Then cast spells to repair your wounded afterwards.
  7. lurkbeast

    CAV 2 Beta

    We played several more games last night. Our love of CAV2 just keeps growing. We are now at 14 games played between all members of our group of 4. We average 4-5 platoons per player when we play. I have only played 2 games myself but I watch a lot of the action going on with my other buddies. We played 3 games, just to play them, then 2 games testing new mechanics. We were up till 1am again. 1. First, we moved the Specialist Platoon to Primary, and this was loved by all involved. 2. In both our our testing games we tossed rear arc, it didn't make one bit of difference except
  8. lurkbeast

    CAV 2 Beta

    Premeasuring - since they didn't change the text in the good habits of play I'd say there's no pre-measuring by default just like Warlord. However, that's what the Scan action can do. Personally, I have no problem with that. After all, games that allow Pre-measure say that it's because the technology is sufficient to allow it. Here, in CAV 2, we get to see that technology in play. If you need to know how far it is to that rock, that building, or that clump of troops then Scan it.
  9. lurkbeast

    CAV 2 Beta

    Yup, also that's exactly how it works right now. The infantry takes a Shaken token so enemy Models are at a bonus to hit them as they disembark (opening scene of Saving Private Ryan anyone? Sorry, but if you disembark troops IN THE LINE OF SIGHT OF THE ENEMY it's going to suck) and so my solution is to disembark troops out of enemy fire (which seems logical to me). But, when it's my activation, I perform a Rally as my first action then do whatever it is I wanted to do (which is the same thing as saying that I only get one action) OR I have the option of not performing a rally and doi
  10. lurkbeast

    CAV 2 Beta

    Wow. Hey dude, I want to make sure Reaper enjoys getting the feedback from us so we can make this game awesome. I read this post and my first reaction was... "did he not read the email Reaper sent? Is he trying to bust Reaper's chops?" Uh no offense, but Spartan, while I think it's awesome that our US Army soldiers have such a code of conduct etc. and are professional enough to not run in the face of the enemy and are disciplined enough to not get stuck into combat this is a game about another time and involves more than just the US Army. In my view of the CAV universe a Malvernian pr
  11. lurkbeast

    Sabre afv

    Or a gunship.
  12. Personally, I hate metal bases. I would rather have a black plastic base so I don't have to worry about my paint getting chipped off the figure. Metal bases have their place, like if the figure would be unbalanced without the extra weight. I remember I wished that Reaper made metal circle cup bases (like their square cup bases) for some of my GW figures back when I used to play. I hated the way my tyrannids would fall forward on their faces. However, if the figure is balanced and does not need the heavy base and I use the figure for games then give me a plastic base. Touching up pain
  13. Thanks for the comments, as a beta tester you've probably got more games under your belt than I but in the above example did not the cavalry already gain thier lance strike with no defensive strike? After the archers move away, true they are no longer pinned but what if in the next round the cavalry get the activation/initiative before the infantry/polearm unit? The archers would be pinned again, and worse they'd be charged by cavalry and be at a -2 penalty since they were shaken and had not yet had the opportunity to Rally... and be lanced again if they retreated too far. And also when t
  14. I hate panic rules. I especially hate panic rules tied to leaders. The game becomes "Kill the leader" and GW even went to far as to create a bogus "I'll take the bullet for you sir" rule to prevent that very thing. Whatever. In a game with big regiments sure, I'll deal with panic rules and they even make sense then. However, I don't want to deal with a bunch of cowards in a "fantasy" skirmish game with heroes and monsters and big tough guys where I am using less than two dozen models. Why would I have taken a coward with me on patrol? I won't even touch on fuzzy gamer math like debating "
  15. It says "successful or not" so I would say they take the damage. As for being harsh, if a grunt gets defensestrated out a second story window he's grease, why should he survive the same fall, attack without a defensive strike, and get a +1 to hit to boot just because he chose to voluntarily take the jump?
  • Create New...