Jump to content


Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Force Organization'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Reaper Discussion
    • FAQs 'n Stuff
    • News
    • Reaper General
    • RVC: Reaper Video Channel
    • Chronoscope
    • Bones Miniatures & Legendary Encounters
    • ReaperCon
  • Craft Corner
    • Show Off
    • Painting Tips & Advice
    • Works In Progress
    • Shutterbug
    • Sculpting
    • Speed / Army / Tabletop Techniques
    • Conversions, Presentation, and Terrain
    • Mini Exchanges and Paint Contests
  • Reaper Games
    • CAV
    • Warlord
  • General Discussion
    • General Fantasy
    • General Sci-Fi
    • General Modern / Historical
    • Kickstarter
    • Off-Topic Rampancy
  • The Sandbox
    • The Gathering
    • The Playing
    • Fiction, Poetry, and Other Abuses

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 1 result

  1. I was looking over my collection of fabulous CAV models yesterday, and I had a thought regarding force organization (though the trigger was in fact reading CAVBoss's update in which he specifically called the Dervish an "attack" role CAV, but that's kind of beside the point): I noticed after looking over my Ritterlich CAVs that I have a radically disproportionate number of recon and fire support CAVs, making it rather difficult to build a viable force within the force org rules. In fact, without a house rule, I have no variety in my core force - it's always rhino + cataphract + something else. If I don't WANT to take rhinos, I have to get my butt down to my FLGS or over to Reapermini.com to order more Cataphracts. Furthermore, I've noticed after quite a few test games that all my forces are sort of ossifying around a core of tried-and-true attack CAVs with maybe an experimental recon or fire support or flight section. My thought, then, is: what if forces were deployed around different role types instead of attack? That is, what if I decided I wanted to play a "Fire Support Company" versus a "Recon" company - the rule being that I have to have more squads with the role of fire support than any other role? Lest this sound like an attempt to build cheesy boomy-shooty armies, please know I am tipping my hat to CAV's overall sense of balance - if I were to field an army of Tiamat's, I have little doubt I'd wind up pounded in to paste as soon as my opponent got within range! For a loose example: I decide I want to run a recon company consisting of four squadrons - this simply means that two of those squadrons must be Type = Recon instead of the usual limitation in which two squadrons must bey Type = Attack. This even has some fluff potential, I think, with key factions preferring their own TOEs: Rach would be attack, of course, but Terrans might be flight or artillery; Malvernis might be Infantry; Adon might be Recon. Just a thought I wanted to share with the group to see what happens.
×