Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Nanite

Incoming! Rules Update.

Recommended Posts

What Qwyk said.

 

also, to me, it feels like it's too easy to cover for your factions weaknesses, when you have unlimited open models available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does a faction have a weakness when they're all driving around armored combat vehicles? Can one of them not turn left or something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, but if they designed the Data Cards so each Faction has some sort of a "flavor" or style of play, and you can then turn around and just ignore all that and instead cherry pick from all the Open Models with the only restriction that one Model has to have Faction affiliation, that really defeats the purpose of putting any effort into making the CAV all different and then grouping them by Faction or UCOR. Since they spent the time to go and change all the stat degredations, and make everything really different, thus postponing the release, you'd think there would be more emphasis on these differences in design.

 

Now, instead of just thinking negative, and putting more limitations on design, why not do something to encourage people to but a bigger Factionalized emphasis on their Task Force design. Give some additional bonus if you build a Task Force solely of your Faction UCOR + Infantry. Say you have the option of using BOTH doctrines. Or perhaps you get a bonus UCOR Doctrine. Consider it an analogy to the Faction Sub-List in Warlord.

 

You in a sense could then have:

Pure Independent.

Hybrid Faction.

Pure Faction.

 

I mean, this is a Factionalized War. Sure, Borsig-Spline might produce some pretty decent stuff that's out there on the open market, but why the hell would anyone other than a Adon fully trust any B-S design at this point over their own UCOR's design, even if it might work a little better? The Adon designed the blasted thing and maybe left a backdoor in some of the target system code so I might be on the field with my Open Ogre and suddenly, my whole board dies because some Adon in a Recluse nearby just dropped a little electronic package in my lap.

 

It just doesn't seem to be so much a war between Factions, which the Second Galaxy War is supposed to be all about. Instead it still really feels more like it's a bunch of Merc units fighting it out, with some very minimal Faction designation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How does a faction have a weakness when they're all driving around armored combat vehicles? Can one of them not turn left or something?

 

The Malverns are not ambiturners, sad but true.

 

But seriously, I think you're missing my point. An all faction specific force will be better at some things then others (strengths and weaknesses). Having unlimited open market models available not only takes some of the flavor out of the game, but really seems to defeat the purpose of having factions at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you are trying to use fluff to dictate force composition and in the base game you should not do this. I would challenge the need for any faction specific model at all.

 

Factions should give you access to something unique (abilities or units) but not limit you in any other way. Faction affiliation should cost points in relation to the faction specific traits.

 

If you need more 'structure' than that it should be agreed upon house rules or league or turney specific rules.

 

If the game is balanced then taking all open market model as you please and paying points for a faction ability should be fine if that is what you like.

 

For instance, I like Terran faction fluff wise but thourghly dislike the look and/or stats of all the faction specific models. Why should I have to take any if if don't like them. I like several of the Open Market Terran UCOR units.

 

If you MUST put in a limit make it based on the points/#units from the faction aligned UCOR's, open market or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you are trying to use fluff to dictate force composition and in the base game you should not do this. I would challenge the need for any faction specific model at all.

 

Factions should give you access to something unique (abilities or units) but not limit you in any other way. Faction affiliation should cost points in relation to the faction specific traits.

 

It's possible I'm being really closed-minded here.

 

I have to argue the opposite though, background is a very important part of games for me, it's critical for the 'draw in' and I feel that does extend to force composition and play.

 

The faction rules will probably stay the same though, so as not to alienate anyone who played CAV 1, and I can't argue with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind it the way it is, but I wouldn't mind if 25% of a faction force had to be from the faction's UCOR (including open market models). Any more and it would start to get restrictive, especially at lower point value games. That would give the force a core that corresponds with it's faction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy games with great background and storyline too. But the game mechanics, and this includes force composition, should not be greatly driven it.

 

For example you should not put tight faction enforcement in, especially if you are not going to provide "roughly equal" units and choices for each faction.

 

The choice of a faction should also not get you anything for free. All faction abilities should cost points.

 

It should be possible to compose a force with any model I want if I choose not to take a faction association.

 

Background and story for the world is necessary, and I enjoy building and playing to it. Just don't try to force it unless you stay "roughly equal".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't mind it the way it is, but I wouldn't mind if 25% of a faction force had to be from the faction's UCOR (including open market models). Any more and it would start to get restrictive, especially at lower point value games. That would give the force a core that corresponds with it's faction.

 

That sounds fine to me.

 

I'm just leery that every army I face is going to include at least one Kikyu, Tsuseki, and Khan. That could get old. ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt that'll happen too much Qwyk with the exception of the Tsuiseki. Each faction has models that are better than the Kikyu and Kahn that aren't much more expensive. The Tsuiseki though is a no brainer if you have the 456 points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so I realized that my faction armies have plenty of Open Models in them.

 

Of course, they're from the the faction's UCOR(s), but still, it deflates my arguments a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that you have protect the players a little here, as well. I dont know for sure, but I would bet that the CAV designers went through a similar thought process - two UCORs per force, heavy on the restriction. But, this would mean radically restructuring the forces for most players. While I agree in principle with the 'only these units for this force' approach, since it allows a much more focussed laying out of special abilities and 'theme', there is danger of the players simply not using it because they want the pretty models. Also, you should be careful that being too heavy with 'theme' does not lead to certain forces becoming 'one trick ponies'.

 

In general, I think that the current system does quite well in theming forces without restricting. I would like to see the abilities a little more focussed on the background for the force to differentiate them - for example the previous Ritterlich ability to take extra armour was interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just so there is something other than just a single model that says:

"I am Ritterlich."

"I am Rach."

"I am Templar."

You know, this is actually going to work out well for me. I have a small 17 model force that I painted up a few years ago for a specific event at GenCon. 5 of the models are now Faction-specific: Butcher x2, Dictator 70 x2 and Centurion. I can't repaint them, b/c they're base coated with an enamel paint to give them a cool shiny look, so they're stuck as is.

 

I'd been sweating, wondering what to do with the figs. I don't need another merc army and I didn't want to just pick a faction and set the 3 models I couldn't use to the side. Then I remembered this thread this morning! Now I've got decent demo forces for either the Templars, Rach or Malvies and all I have to do is trade out a couple of models. ::D:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See, I almost always build for fun and theme rather than statistical superiority. My Adonese and Templar Faction forces will be made up almost entirely of Faction models and open market models manufactured by the Nationalized UCORS because honestly I think, background-wise, it makes the most sense to use the machines you can actually get spare parts for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, and my Ritterlich force will be built that way (to a point, but I still have to use non-KDM tanks), but I think what I mentioned above is a perfect example of why Reaper did this the way they did. Say I'm an average player and those 17 figs are all I have. Without having to repaint them, I've got my choice of 3 different factions to try out, without having to buy a single new mini. Maybe I decide to try Rach and use the Centurion to proxy an Emporer.

 

Once I've given each faction a try, then I can go out and buy the faction-specific models I like.

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...