Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ivarr

Strikes Playtested MORE

Recommended Posts

That's already in the Beta rules -- the No Strikes and no assets options have been there since Open Beta 1.0 was released.

 

And why would defensively-themed strikes be any more over-the top than the horrociousness you guys are complaining about? I'm talking about a couple of similarly-pointed options to deal with the stuff people claim is broken.

 

Those strafing runs could be very easily countered by buying an asset representing air superiority fighters keeping the bombers doing the strafing out of the battlefield.

 

Strikes, when used judiciously, add an imprtant aspect to the game. Anything, when done over the top, will catch people by surprise the first few times until someone figures out a way around it.

 

You want to know the quick and easy way to fix it? Remove FIST/1 from Rifle teams and heavy rifle teams. Make a Spotter team to replace them that can only be fielded once per platoon.

 

The problem doesn't really lie with the strikes themselves being overpowered. It's with the number of models that are able to utilize them effectively. To give the terrans their strike advantage, change it so that all models with WIZZO also gain FIST/1(or increase their FIST rating by 1 if they already have it), and allow them to field two spotter teams per platoon, up to the platoon's regular maximum model count. It still gives them character, but eliminates the 12 strikes per infantry platoon activation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You want to know the quick and easy way to fix it? Remove FIST/1 from Rifle teams and heavy rifle teams. Make a Spotter team to replace them that can only be fielded once per platoon.

 

The problem doesn't really lie with the strikes themselves being overpowered. It's with the number of models that are able to utilize them effectively. To give the terrans their strike advantage, change it so that all models with WIZZO also gain FIST/1(or increase their FIST rating by 1 if they already have it), and allow them to field two spotter teams per platoon, up to the platoon's regular maximum model count. It still gives them character, but eliminates the 12 strikes per infantry platoon activation.

Hmmm... that's probably one of the best ideas I've seen so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could even make it so that the Spotter upgrade is done similar to inquisitors for Malvies, where you get a certain number of models upgraded to FIST/1 based on the points being played.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erion: "The problem doesn't really lie with the strikes themselves being overpowered. It's with the number of models that are able to utilize them effectively. To give the terrans their strike advantage, change it so that all models with WIZZO also gain FIST/1(or increase their FIST rating by 1 if they already have it), and allow them to field two spotter teams per platoon, up to the platoon's regular maximum model count. It still gives them character, but eliminates the 12 strikes per infantry platoon activation."

 

That is a very good solution. And I wouldn't mind seeing something like that take effect. Right now with the way strikes are they take away from the game. Maybe not for everyone, but definately enough of us to bring up this concern. Now adding counterstrikes....I don't believe i should have to start taking into consideration how many strikes my opponent is going to throw at me and how many points I now need to put aside for counter strikes, in addition to any strikes i'm already looking using myself. I personally got into the game for the models, the genre, and the rules of engagement. I didn't get into the game so i can buy models and put them on the table and never move them because the game comes down to where we put the models and how many strikes/counterstrikes it's going to take......

 

 

I feel artillery is aobut he only asset relevent at this stage in combat. like others have stated. this is the part of battle that is after initial bombardment and strikes. this is where is comes down to tactics, manuevering and ferreting out you emeny that didn't get blown up from the bombardment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now adding counterstrikes....I don't believe i should have to start taking into consideration how many strikes my opponent is going to throw at me and how many points I now need to put aside for counter strikes, in addition to any strikes i'm already looking using myself. I personally got into the game for the models, the genre, and the rules of engagement. I didn't get into the game so i can buy  models and put them on the table and never move them because the game comes down to where we put the models and how many strikes/counterstrikes it's going to take....

Why not?

 

Real world militaries plan operations based on all of the enemy's forces expected to be encountered. Why wouldn't you plan some Superiority fighters to help keep his air assets at bay? And there's a unit in the PA national guard who's entire job it is to track back incoming enemy artillery to its origination point for elimination.

 

The point behind including counterstrikes would be to make someone reconsider taking a buttload of strikes because there's no way for someone to deal with them if the initiative deck falls the right way.

 

I understand your frustration with this, but if someone can pay 10 points for a strike that's capable of damaging several of my models, then it makes sense to me to make countering those strikes just as cheap and effective.

 

Of course, if someone's really in the game for the models, why are they spending 660 points on air strikes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"And there's a unit in the PA national guard who's entire job it is to track back incoming enemy artillery to its origination point for elimination"

 

right, for artillery that is not on the table. Meaning those strikes are in the background. Also take note that I stated that Artillery was acceptable...but preliminary.

 

"Of course, if someone's really in the game for the models, why are they spending 660 points on air strikes?"

 

Right, and on the counter strikes........

 

you know thinking about it more you could include counterstrikes into strikes in general....dare say defensive fire for strikes.....anytime a strike is called there is percentage that a counterstrike may be away. this in itself would limit the amount of strikes a player might want to take knowing that everytime he/she does it may cause harm to his/her own models....?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering CAV is supposed to be a game centered on (fairly) small unit tactics why not limit strikes to the amount of points you field?

Say, for a 1-1000 point force you get 1 strike. 1001-2500 you get 2. 2501-4000 you get 3, etc. etc. This solves the problem of "wasting" points on strikes and counterstrikes. Both you and your opponent have a set amount of strikes that you know are coming to the table.

This also helps simulate the feeling of "quick and dirty" engagements by limiting strikes to "realistic" levels. (Think about an average CAV2 2000 point force, is it even REMOTELY "realistic" that a force that small would have dozens and dozens of strike aircraft orbiting around waiting for them to call in a strafing run???)

To help keep the Terran faction ability going it could be done so Terran forces are allowed 1 extra strike for every force that is 1001 points or higher. Example: 1-1000 point force EVERYONE gets 1 and ONLY 1 strike. 1001-2500 point force gives you 2 strikes, the Terrans get 3, 2501-4000 points gives you 3 strikes the Terrans get 4 etc, etc, etc.

Just a theory... :mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strikes are not going to be optional, and they arn't going to be removed. That was the last word I heard.

 

Matt and I talked about Strikes just awhile back and the solution is in order and should be avalible soon.

 

But Ivar as has been asked, I would like to see a full force list on both sides

 

Thanks

 

Mad Pat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd really like to see the forces Ivarr's talking about and a turn by turn breakdown, including dice rolls, of this "Terran monster". I've never had my Terrans be anywhere near this effective with strikes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Strikes are not going to be optional, and they arn't going to be removed. That was the last word I heard.

 

Matt and I talked about Strikes just awhile back and the solution is in order and should be avalible soon.

 

But Ivar as has been asked, I would like to see a full force list on both sides

 

Thanks

 

Mad Pat

Words from on high!!! Quick, someone grab a chisel and a mallet!! ::D::poke:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Strikes are not going to be optional, and they arn't going to be removed.  That was the last word I heard.

 

Matt and I talked about Strikes just awhile back and the solution is in order and should be avalible soon.

 

But Ivar as has been asked, I would like to see a full force list on both sides

 

Thanks

 

Mad Pat

Words from on high!!! Quick, someone grab a chisel and a mallet!! ::D::poke:

Pat's the "burning bush" around here. ::):

 

 

*ducks*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Strikes are not going to be optional, and they arn't going to be removed.  That was the last word I heard.

 

Matt and I talked about Strikes just awhile back and the solution is in order and should be avalible soon.

 

But Ivar as has been asked, I would like to see a full force list on both sides

 

Thanks

 

Mad Pat

Words from on high!!! Quick, someone grab a chisel and a mallet!! ::D::poke:

Pat's the "burning bush" around here. ::):

 

 

*ducks*

now where have I heard that before <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, as a DIEHARD Terran player I have a lot to say about strikes:

 

1: yes, they can be game winners, BUT, like Spartan said my Terrans have never been as effective as what Ivarr describes. (how about that unit breakdown Ivarr??, it would help us understand the game more.)

 

2: I happen to like Erion's suggestion a lot, but then I have A LOT of Thunderbirds in my force (8 total, typically I use 2-4 on a regular basis depending on points)

 

3: I also think we should all do as Mad Pat suggested and wait for the OFFICIAL answer to come down from Matt and Co.

 

 

So far there have been several things that have needed work in CAV2, that why it is called a BETA release, our job is to fold, spindle and mutilate any and everything in any and every combination our (demented) minds can come up with. The most important thing we need to concentrate on right now is not WHO is winning, but WHY. IF the Terrans are winning more because of a SA (like strikes) then we definitely need to perform surgery on that SA and fix it. If they are winning because people are abusing (pushing the tasteful limits of) the SA then the problem isn't the SA it is the mind set that pushed it that direction.

My personal peeve and several other folks peeve as well is still the flamer SA, I am patiently waiting to see how that is handeld in the next Beta release and TRYING not to rant about the (till now) lack of said release.

 

I have read the posts from everyone who has posted on this topic and have TRIED not to respond "from the hip" so to speak. Having been a 40k player since the game was introduced I am all to familiar with the "typical" attitude towards gamers from a game company or author, I was actually at a DragonCon here in Atlanta once (back in the early 80's) (yeah I am that old) when Gary Gygax was asked why he didn't make a change to D&D that many, MANY people had been begging for and had been writing both to Dragon magazine and to TSR itself about, his reply: "It's my game and that is not what I wanted." I have never heard (read) this from Reaper even one time since I joined this forum or Mil-Net, we have been given a chance that most other companies would never consider.

 

Personally speaking, (and only personally) I have suffered some of the most humiliating moments of my gaming experience testing the CAV2 rules, I have felt "violated" more than once because of the way the game was going but I keep reminding myself that I am TESTING the new rules not PLAYING a normal competitive game and that bad breaks are part of the process.

Honestly guys, I suggest you drop the "strikes" topic for a while and just PLAY a game, use the CAV1 rules if you want, but TAKE A BREAK from the "unstoppable, invincible Strike SA" army for a while. Seriously, you'll stay sane longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Waits patiently for Ivarr's 'unbeatable' Terran force list*

 

Jamie, if/when he posts it, you want to playtest it against something I put together from my Templars or Adonese?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...