Jump to content

The Adon Economic Confederation (NADO)


Easy E
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 137
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

So, in my opinion is they need a couple of CAVs with some defense / staying armor.

It's called 2x ECM Bubble and the only 4 TC Model in the game. They are the electronics faction, afterall. :poke:

 

I am trying to understand this rationale. So help me out.

The bubble is bigger than anyothers but it doesn't provide any greater protection.

Doesn't that mean it is only more effective if I have more models under the bubble?

Also I have to sacrifice an action to turn the bubble on. It's not a freebie like armor is.

How much is one extra action worth? Just you saying that makes me think, It is over valued.

 

also they are not just an electronics faction. As I recall there are two Factions.

and while I can play Adonese.. I am not required to take that faction.

More armor please.

 

I also understand that you are saying Adon is a lighter more mobile force. (Not neccesarily cheaper) I would tend to agree with that.

but it doesn't play out like that in game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the primary benefits of the larger bubble is being able to avoid the "Huddle" around your Elint unit. Thus your less prone to the standard strike tactics deployed to counter electronic support units.

 

Adon's benefit is range, on average 12 inches over the other factions. I wouldn't expect to see their armor values increase

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even though the Mantis is by far one of my favorite CAVs from the asthetics point of view, I dont play Adon as much as some of the others so my opinion is limited. But, one of the main reasons I dont play Adon as much is that the average DV for them is much lower than the others. Yes, their range is longe, but that low DV just makes me wince.

 

So, in my opinion is they need a couple of CAVs with some defense / staying armor.

 

 

Jason,

 

this is not a Adonese question. But what is that color you painted on your models.. Burnt orange? You're not a Texas Fan are you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the primary benefits of the larger bubble is being able to avoid the "Huddle" around your Elint unit. Thus your less prone to the standard strike tactics deployed to counter electronic support units.

 

Adon's benefit is range, on average 12 inches over the other factions. I wouldn't expect to see their armor values increase

 

 

Thanks Pat I didn't/don't expect any values to change. But that answer chrome gave was bogus. You can't add value to a model based up potential docterine benefits.

 

Also 12 inches is a significant increase As I compute that's 3 range factors on average. However. So as I compute Values that Adon on average +3 in range

12 inches is not significant on the standard 4' x 4' or 4'x6' Playfield. Where the max range is 68" (4x4) and 87" (4x6) (Not acheivable from most set up rules)

and the max potential starting ranges are 54" (4x4) and 76" (4x6) and a realistic value of 49" (4x4) and 70" (4x6)

 

this being said it takes units beween 2 and 3 turns to close the gap to thier optimal weapon ranges. I realize two or three turns is nearly half the game with a ranged advantage.

but 12" only offers only potentially one turn advantage to the adonese. (Adonese are firing at optimal range and thier opponent is firing at ione range increment less) The exception being the slower moving vehicles. (Cav/Attacks) All others can close the gap in one round, and this only takes into account the Adonese being in a fully defensive posture. If the objective is middle of the board or beyond.. Range quickly goes south against Adonese forces. Range beyond 36" is always in the Adonese favor, below 36" is always in the favor of the Adonese opponent.

the new rules are a godsend, but nothing has been done to address these short comings.

 

I still believe Costs should be revamped. I am sorry I still believe that. I am not under the expectation they will be

I also believe setups (Especially tournement setups) should be more varied. Even playing across the diagonel of the table would help the adonese. Even if not all the time.

the adonese beside being armor deficient. Have a number of abitlities that cost them an action. These powers are not only over priced, but because they cost an action, limit the firepower (Move shoot and communicate)of the adonese group.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crome's statement is far from bogus. All and I repeat All of the potential doctrine benefits were developed around a theory of adding value to a model or group of models. That statement comes from not only a knowledge of the development process and mindset but an experience level with the game as well. Time and time again the Adon ability to disperse their formations has proven an advantage against units who can not preform the same open formations. The scenarios you outline seem to be based on a simple face to face strait line movement engagement, with little or no regard to use of terrain, strategic maneuvering or combined asset deployment. When properly deployed the Adon ability to disperse their formations, maneuver for shots and "dance" outside of their opponents effective ranges all the while having better numbers for their attacks can be quite decisive. This is inversely true for the Rach's ability to close the gap to the "fist fight" ranges where their weapons become most effective.

 

Costs are always being looked at, the issue comes around to how folks value each item. For example the Cost of DV generated 4 different opinions on its value both game wise and how it should be weighed out in the overall point structure in one meeting alone.

 

As for which Adon abilities your concerned with I'm honestly at a loss. Outside of their factional doctrines they have the same abilities as all the other units, If your discussing electronic warfare then use they most certainly will cost an action to preform as there must be a cost in time, and effort as well as points for gaining the types of bonuses given.

 

I haven't heard many concerns with setups but if you would start a new thread in the general rules area describing your concerns I'd be interested in seeing them. The setup system is fairly strait forward and in line with most major game systems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crome's statement is far from bogus. All and I repeat All of the potential doctrine benefits were developed around a theory of adding value to a model or group of models. That statement comes from not only a knowledge of the development process and mindset but an experience level with the game as well. Time and time again the Adon ability to disperse their formations has proven an advantage against units who can not preform the same open formations. The scenarios you outline seem to be based on a simple face to face strait line movement engagement, with little or no regard to use of terrain, strategic maneuvering or combined asset deployment. When properly deployed the Adon ability to disperse their formations, maneuver for shots and "dance" outside of their opponents effective ranges all the while having better numbers for their attacks can be quite decisive. This is inversely true for the Rach's ability to close the gap to the "fist fight" ranges where their weapons become most effective.

 

Costs are always being looked at, the issue comes around to how folks value each item. For example the Cost of DV generated 4 different opinions on its value both game wise and how it should be weighed out in the overall point structure in one meeting alone.

 

As for which Adon abilities your concerned with I'm honestly at a loss. Outside of their factional doctrines they have the same abilities as all the other units, If your discussing electronic warfare then use they most certainly will cost an action to preform as there must be a cost in time, and effort as well as points for gaining the types of bonuses given.

 

I haven't heard many concerns with setups but if you would start a new thread in the general rules area describing your concerns I'd be interested in seeing them. The setup system is fairly strait forward and in line with most major game systems.

 

I called it bogus, because the call (or the reason a player didn't play more Adon was because of lack of DV) To which he responded with one unit and a faction doctrine. That's very slim reasoning.

No doubt all faction docrines are designed around the theory of adding value to a model or group of models. If it doesn't what is the point? I am saying you cant add value to a model based up the potential faction doctrine. Specifically, I am saying you can't add extra costs to a unit because of a potential faction.

 

Maybe, I was a little hard on Chrome. So I apologize.

 

I don't undersand how DV could ever generate 4 different opinions ... To me It is the only static Value on the card. Regardless of how you degrade.. It is always the number of pips you have. Seems very simple to me to just ADD the points up.. You have what you have. A dictator has 58 Armor points an emperor has 71 points . Strictly speaking Dictators has +58points of armor and an Emperor has +71. You can't really adjust armor in any other way. The dictator has six damage track and the emperor has eight this is completely seperate entity. It deserves entirely different consideration as it effects your ability to sustain fire and redistribute fire. Effecting both your offensive and defensive stance. But DV is pretty much static.

 

Actually they don't have the same abilities as all other units. (More into that on a later post)

 

Faction abilities Adon is the only faction ability that steals offensive power to make up for a difficency in defensive power. It is limited to defeating one type of tactic. Where as the other factions don't try to defeat any tactics it is just an ability tacked on.

 

(Please don't respond to this till I get my facts in order, then I'll let every one blast away)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll add my .02 to this one since I've played both as and against Adonese forces fielded by Pat more than once. As Chrome correctly stated, the "Aggressive Electronic Warfare" Doctrine for the Adonese gives them a 2x multiplier on their EW coverage and they field the only 4 TC model in the game (the Recluse). It provides greater protection in allowing the breakup of the huddle as Pat has pointed out, instead of a spread of 6" as most other bubbles are, you're now at 16" diameter. Put them inside good terrain and they're tough buggers to reach out and touch. Add on top of that the extra ECM point as well as the extra EST point and the Recluse when paired with other models proves itself to be a huge benefit. Playing as the Terran'as as I normally do, this plays havoc with my airstrikes. Other factional doctrines don't make the bubble larger so most players stick together nicely allowing air strikes to have a greater chance at hitting more than one target. When playing against an Adonese force, you're going to find many of the models staggered in such a way that you won't be able to get many in one strikes plus some of them may be outside the strikes 12" range. After Pat kicked me around the table once with the Recluse I hated them so much I went and bought me a pack and they've served me well as both Adonese and Independent roles.

 

We'll be playing Saturday for Soonday at the Asylum, come on down and join the fun! Bring whomever you want along and if you want us to show it on the board, we'll be more than happy to diagram it out for you so you can understand it better. I think once you actually play it and see it in action it will make more sense to you, I think you're not fully understanding how the models play within the faction doctrines. Plus it's Soonday, so you HAVE to be there. It's mandatory for all CAV players. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i agree on soonday... mandatory for anyone with even a inkling for CAV....

 

as far as adon, i have not really played them..... i am building them though (2 orges, mantis and 2 scarabs at present) but as far as faction abilities all have thier pluses and minuses... example rach lose dv if they increase their movement.. it comes down to playing the faction ability to best of your capabilities

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree, models WILL very in points based on Factions. Look at all the other minigames with various factions. They all have specific pros and cons and what they are good/bad at. Tau for 40k, great at range, you get in close and they are meat. Does this effect there cost per mini?? Heck yeah it does. Thats what gives the army its flavor and feel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I said that the concept of DV generated 4 opinions i was referencing how to value that number. should the offensive power of a unit cost the same as its defensive power? How many points should units pay for one point of DV? Its not as strait forward as saying add the pips together, that would be a battletech concept. You have to take into account the units DT level as well as its DV level. Remember that DV is more then just the armor bolted on the frame.

 

Now back to our discussion on Adon, with the concept that they are long range shooters with superior electronics but moderate level of protection, what kind of holes need to be filled?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I said that the concept of DV generated 4 opinions i was referencing how to value that number. should the offensive power of a unit cost the same as its defensive power? How many points should units pay for one point of DV? Its not as strait forward as saying add the pips together, that would be a battletech concept. You have to take into account the units DT level as well as its DV level. Remember that DV is more then just the armor bolted on the frame.

 

Now back to our discussion on Adon, with the concept that they are long range shooters with superior electronics but moderate level of protection, what kind of holes need to be filled?

 

regardless of whether it is a Battletech concept or not..( I wouldn't know never played Battletech, although I did read the Michael Stackpole novels)

DV is Static.. a set number of points.. Yes there is probably an upper limit you can assign a particular unit.

 

And just follow along with me, DV is the ability to resist being hit. Whether that be due to electronics, armor, size, shape, and movement. I don't think there is any debate on that.

but This make DV a static representation. Regardless of the number of damage tracks it has. That is something else entirely.

I believe you said how a unit degrades also plays a role (this is something entirely seperate). If you have 15 armor whether you have it spread over two tracks or eight tracks.

DV is dealing with percentage chance of getting hit (Damage Avoidance)

DT is dealing with survivability (and utility [Defensive/Offensive] whle surviving)

 

So if we take the Ogre and Ogre OEM as examples

 

OEM 63 DV points

ADON 71 DV points Translates into a 13% overall damage avoidance value regardless of the number of tracks.

 

or the Ogre oem 63 DV points Ogre OEM only enjoys damage avoidance of 5%

and the dragoon 60 DV points.

 

DT value has to computed against a base line for all horizontal (data card) categories (Movement with a movement type modifier, Repair, EXP, CCV,TC, DV and Firepower Output [firepower with a range mod])

 

DV influences DT but DT is a completely seperate value. It is important to note that the computation is not a per DT.

 

 

 

Now DT value is a little more difficult to calculate.

But essentially to compute that you have to have a base line mean value. of all values across board for that DT the value +/- the average value for that DT Influence the value of that indivdual DT.

So DV influences DT but DT does not influence DV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some more thoughts following from my earlier posts: Adon is rather vulnerable to soft enemies, especially fast or electronics-protected ones (harder to hit with IFMs). They tricky question then is how does long range combine with shredder, as most shredder weapons have 24" range or less. The most believable option would be a shredder DFM platform. Another thing that would be nice to see is an attack aircraft--not filling a hole, persay, just a model type that doesn't really exist for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can have a solid round that would be of a shredder type weapon, it would just simply be high explosive fragmentation as opposed to a penetrating round. So no worries there, but yes Adon does have issues with soft units, I was on the receiving end of that fun the other night.

 

Aircraft would be awesome, bit hard for us to scratch build

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm...yeah, there isn't really any way to kitbash an aircraft and have it look Adonese. Plus, kitbashed aircraft would be extremely expensive...

 

I'm leaning towards a Recon or Attack vehicle with some heavy shredder weaponry--an Adonese, shredder-based Banshee, basically. Hover would be nice, though the Scarab might make a good starting point as well--it's fast, has a nice model, and the turret is pretty easy to modify or replace. Could go with either the missiles or high explosive rounds, then. Anything with +4/5 against soft, a decent range, and AA.

 

Another existing vehicle with similarities: the Poltergeist. Make it lighter and faster, and switch the GGCs for a more Adonese weapon, and you're set (too bad the model has to change, I really like the poltergeist model as is...)

Link to comment
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.   Restore formatting

  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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...