Are we looking at it wrong?

[Erion]

I like that you're mixing it up on round one. Much better than something like Heavy Gear where your basic weapons have a maximum range of 16" with -3 or -4 to hit (been a while since I've played) before any onther modifiers come into play.

[Sergeant_Crunch]

It's merely a matter of personal preference for me. I prefer to start at just beyond effective range (for whatever game system), it forces both sides to use the terrain laid out to plan their movement to get the best firing solutions without making themselves a giant target themselves. My feeling is that if you're already in the firefight when the first turn begins that deployment has too much of an effect on the outcome of the game.

[Trilan]

It's merely a matter of personal preference for me. I prefer to start at just beyond effective range (for whatever game system), it forces both sides to use the terrain laid out to plan their movement to get the best firing solutions without making themselves a giant target themselves. My feeling is that if you're already in the firefight when the first turn begins that deployment has too much of an effect on the outcome of the game.

You're right about it being personal preference, and I do agree with you about the starting just out of range... It's really frustrating if your playing something like warhammer and it takes 3 rounds to get your dwarves into combat, but at the same time if there's no planning needed then you might as well go play Missile Command...

[Spartan6]

It's merely a matter of personal preference for me. I prefer to start at just beyond effective range (for whatever game system), it forces both sides to use the terrain laid out to plan their movement to get the best firing solutions without making themselves a giant target themselves. My feeling is that if you're already in the firefight when the first turn begins that deployment has too much of an effect on the outcome of the game.

I kinda like the manuever element involved too.

[Chrome]

Gee, kinda sounds like Reapers giving each of you the flexibility to do what you want, since they've only given recommended table sizes and not made them an absolute. If you want to mix it up right away, play on a 6' or 4' long table. If you want to maneuver for a turn, play on an 8 footer.

 

Nice and simple.

[Trilan]

Actually you don't have that option with the new rules without a truly massive table due to the presence of the range bands rather than a defined range. For example a Thunderbird firing at a hard target with a DV11 unit at a range of 64 inches has a 50% chance to hit (terrain mods), and can easily close to 64" in the first turn before the second player gets to move a unit. Plus if he uses IF instead then the number of attacks goes down, but the 50% range increases to 76". And sucessfully scanning to fire would add a further +2 to hit on the IF.

 

Extending out to the third range band, the Thunderbird can hit lengthwise table edge to table edge on an 8' table with a 27% chance to hit.

 

I only checked stats on the Thunderbird, but there are plenty of 32" range units... and a handful of 36"ers, including the Manitcore which can IF 84" in it's second band.

 

With ranges like that you rule out playing (with tactics anyway) on someone dining room table, or open day at a local gaming store where they have to put 2 games on their 8' tables due to lack of space.

[Sergeant_Crunch]

It doesn't rule out tactics at any range really. I don't consider 27% favorable odds and wouldn't waste the shot. And unless you're playing on a clear to lightly terrained board (I like lots of terrain) there is the search for that spot where you can maximize your attack while minimizing the effectiveness of defensive fire. There is the decision on whether or not to concentrate fire one one target or spread the love around. Tactics is always involved. All I'm saying is that I prefer to start at longer distances and move to contact.

 

Delayed deployment might make more sense on a small table like a 4x4 especially if you're looking at urban warfare, one team made contact and the rest of the unit is moving to join kind of thing for scenario play. Anyway, we've (points at self) gotten a bit OT with the discussion of board size. (thinks of bad joke, but decides against it, family board and all)

[Mad Pat]

With ranges like that you rule out playing (with tactics anyway) on someone dining room table, or open day at a local gaming store where they have to put 2 games on their 8' tables due to lack of space.

 

I would actually have to disagree with you on this. We've tested this game quite often on a 4*4 table and can easly be done on a dinner table in any home usa.

 

one of the most brutal fights I've fought was testing of the Mastadon, two Mastadon's vs. two Rhino's on a 4*4 table.

 

Its all about the terrain. If your going to throw them down on a 4*4 table with little to no terrain then yes your looking at problems. This game though runs great on anything from a small table up to as big as you want. I tried to get the gang at GenCon to throw down on what figured out was about a 5 by 25 foot table we had avalible but they desided to run a HUGE warlord game insted.

 

Mad Pat

[papabees]

I tried to get the gang at GenCon to throw down on what figured out was about a 5 by 25 foot table we had avalible but they desided to run a HUGE warlord game insted.

 

Mad Pat

HERESY!

[Mad Pat]

well it was a impressive 5 on 5 game with 1000 points each.

 

and we could have played CAV2 on Sat night, but I really really wanted to get some sleep insteed.

 

Mad Pat

[Spartan6]

well it was a impressive 5 on 5 game with 1000 points each.

 

and we could have played CAV2 on Sat night, but I really really wanted to get some sleep insteed.

 

Mad Pat

wuss.

[mughzee]

So does it look like that the end result is increasing deployment to width of table x 12" and maybe a touch of an increase in points?

[papabees]

So does it look like that the end result is increasing deployment to width of table x 12" and maybe a touch of an increase in points?

I find it funny that this is the end result of a 14 page topic. We talk things to death don't we.

[Crazy8]

So does it look like that the end result is increasing deployment to width of table x 12" and maybe a touch of an increase in points?

I don't see any other viable solutions being fielded anymore... and we've pretty much beat this horse beyond death...

[Saint of Sinners]

Well, the horse my yet still have a bit of life left in her... but I'll just wait and see how she fairs in the second build of the beta.