Jump to content

RAGE Chronicles 2008


Chrome
 Share

Recommended Posts

The 2008 edition of RAGE Chronicles for CAV is now available. This is a not-quite-final edition, which is still pending final layout from Reaper. Currently only the rules are available, data cards are expected later in the week.

 

For those of you unfamiliar with the RAGE Chronicles, they are an annual publication from Reaper that gathers all of the past year's errata into one easy to read document. In CAV's case, it combines the errata released earlier this year by Mil-Net, along with some newer changes to the game. We've put a lot of work into making CAV the best it can be. We hope it was time well spent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I am loving it so far, but I have to ask where the Ritterlich Doctrine(s) went? I know they were good, but were they so good that they had to be cut entirely? :lol:

 

I am really liking the clarifications...many of which SuccessorLord and I have bugged you over during the last few months (Hooray! I have had an impact upon the game!). Especially the IA and CFP clarifications.

 

I would like to thank you (and all your cohorts) for all the work you have done on this product and CAV in general. It is endearing to know that I have bought into a game with dedicated support from those who will listen to the players and do something about problems with the system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There seems to be quite a bit of confusion on the Doctrines. RC08 is only errata, it only lists the rules that were changed. If a Doctrine (or rule or SA or whatever) is listed in RC08, that is the version of that mechanic that you should use. For everything else, revert to what's in the rulebook.

 

So for the Templars, you'd use the version of Elite Training Doctrine listed in RC08 and you'd use the version of Superior Equipment Doctrine in the rulebook. No changes were required on either of the Ritt doctrines, so just continue to use the originals. ::):

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

Thanks to those involved for getting this out to us as quickly as reasonably possible. I must commend all those involved for keeping CAV such a responsive game. It is one of it's best qualities. I've now read through the entire document a couple of times. The first time I had various cheers and attacks of Tourette's syndrome; so by the second reading it was a much colder, more logical dissection.

 

The questions I am immediately left with are:

 

1) Factional Doctrines - Do the factional affiliations now not matter at all? Is the 25% of total points now strictly by Manufacturer, is it declared Manufacturer and and Factional affiliation, or will the Factional affiliation be totally dropped on the new cards?

 

2) Valid B2B contact -

Valid B2B has been achieved when the two Models involved have flat base sides touching.
I read this to mean that two bases must be in full contact with their flat side. Can two bases be in valid B2B with the same base side? If two Infantry bases are CC'ing a Warlord and one is flat-to-flat with the Warlord's #4 (rear) base side then to claim B2B the second infantry section would have to be in contact with side #3 or #5 base side. They couldn't arrange themselves so that both their bases contacted the Warlord's #4 base side.

 

3) Jump Infantry - For moving through and LoS do Infantry with MClass Air use the Infantry rules, the Air rules, or something in between?

 

4) Flamer - No I'm not going to rant again (but since Flamer is a unique DA weapon I just want to see the answer to this question in print). It is not exempted anywhere that I can find, so then Flamers are effected normally by Jamming/ECM bubbles? What happens if only part of a Flamer's AoE is under the effect of a Jamming/ECM Action? Would all models under the template then be harder to hit? No mention was made of the intervening terrain blocking Flamers and/or Flamers not being allowed in Salvo strikes?

 

5) Satchel Charge - Is assigned to a specific Infantry section, not model. Does this still work if the Infantry section has two bases and they're on opposite sides of the table?

 

6) Terran Doctrine - The free points alloted in the two doctrines count towards your strikes limit? The Malvernis conscription doctrine specifically allows you to exceed limits. The re-write of the Terran doctrine does not seem bad, otherwise, but this seems excessive. It's already an unstated limit that any opponent with experience fighting Terrans knows to knock out FiSTers thereby negating the entire doctrine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) Factional Doctrines - Do the factional affiliations now not matter at all? Is the 25% of total points now strictly by Manufacturer, is it declared Manufacturer and and Factional affiliation, or will the Factional affiliation be totally dropped on the new cards?

Faction Affiliation is still very important. If you're building a Malvernis army you still can't use Ritterlich, Rach, Templar, Adon or Terran faction affiliated models. You can use Open Models from any of those factions UCORs though, like an Adon/B-S Scorpion.

 

2) Valid B2B contact - Can two bases be in valid B2B with the same base side? If two Infantry bases are CC'ing a Warlord and one is flat-to-flat with the Warlord's #4 (rear) base side then to claim B2B the second infantry section would have to be in contact with side #3 or #5 base side. They couldn't arrange themselves so that both their bases contacted the Warlord's #4 base side.

2 CAV Hex Bases can not both be in flat side contact with the same 3rd hex base flat side. Its physically impossible.

 

3) Jump Infantry - For moving through and LoS do Infantry with MClass Air use the Infantry rules, the Air rules, or something in between?

That's a good question. When the Infantry are performing a Move Action, they'd use the rules for MClass Air models moving through other models freely. For other models moving through jet pack infantry, I'm not sure. Give us a couple days to chew on it and we'll come back with an answer.

 

4) Flamer - It is not exempted anywhere that I can find, so then Flamers are effected normally by Jamming/ECM bubbles? What happens if only part of a Flamer's AoE is under the effect of a Jamming/ECM Action?

As it is currently written, yes, Flamer's gain a bonus from Target Lock and EST Bubbles. You can only TL individual Models now though, so the bonus would only be applied against that specific target.

 

This was not my intention though, I'd planned on changing Flamer so that TL did not effect it, it simply slipped my mind with all of the other things swimming around in my head.

 

No mention was made of the intervening terrain blocking Flamers and/or Flamers not being allowed in Salvo strikes?

Two more things that I forgot about. I'll get them added for the final doc.

 

5) Satchel Charge - Is assigned to a specific Infantry section, not model. Does this still work if the Infantry section has two bases and they're on opposite sides of the table?

Yes.

 

6) Terran Doctrine - The free points alloted in the two doctrines count towards your strikes limit? The Malvernis conscription doctrine specifically allows you to exceed limits. The re-write of the Terran doctrine does not seem bad, otherwise, but this seems excessive. It's already an unstated limit that any opponent with experience fighting Terrans knows to knock out FiSTers thereby negating the entire doctrine.

So you're saying that b/c its so easy to neurtalize the Terran Doctrines by killing their FIST models that you want to be able to take /more/ Strikes? So you can have even more un-usable Strikes once your FIST units are gone? (just jerking your chain)

 

The 20% Strike Limit has been tested for over 3 years. Its not going to change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6) Terran Doctrine - The free points alloted in the two doctrines count towards your strikes limit? The Malvernis conscription doctrine specifically allows you to exceed limits. The re-write of the Terran doctrine does not seem bad, otherwise, but this seems excessive. It's already an unstated limit that any opponent with experience fighting Terrans knows to knock out FiSTers thereby negating the entire doctrine.

 

The 10% (of Task Force) free points count against your 20% Strike Assets, not your Task Force. So, in a 3000 point game, you would have a total possible number of points equal to 3300 (3000 for task force, 300 additional for strikes) of which a total of 600 may be spent on strikes (basically pay half; leaving 2700 points), vs. your opponent's 3000 points. You could use the 'saved' points to get extra FIST units if you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can already tell that those two are going to cause huge issues, they need to be clearer. But if you follow the rules for buying /X type Upgrades, you have to buy the lowest upgrade first, then pay for each additional level. So you have to pay 40 points to buy EST/2, then another 20 points to get EST/3, for 60 points total.

 

There is not EST/1 b/c you can't physically get the center points of 2 models w/in 1" of each other.

 

Maybe a simple example would be the best way to explain it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can already tell that those two are going to cause huge issues, they need to be clearer. But if you follow the rules for buying /X type Upgrades, you have to buy the lowest upgrade first, then pay for each additional level. So you have to pay 40 points to buy EST/2, then another 20 points to get EST/3, for 60 points total.

 

There is not EST/1 b/c you can't physically get the center points of 2 models w/in 1" of each other.

 

Maybe a simple example would be the best way to explain it?

It makes perfect sense, I was just veryifying that it was intentional and not a missed typo. I actually like the idea of the big initial buy-in with a lower improvment cost, but it was unpresidented (as far as I could tell) within the Upgrades so I wanted to double check it. Will any of the existing upgrades be modified to this new cost paradigm?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[hugepost]

 

Well, until they get wiped out after deploying behind the enemy. But boy howdy did they make an entrance. Nothing like an Atomic WMD Cruise Missile to announce your presence! But I'm getting ahead of myself.

 

Forlorn Hope and I played a 4000 point game today to try out the new datacards and the RC08 changes. Funny thing is that the forces we picked were seemingly purpose built to fight the exact opposite type of force we faced. Mine was a Rach infantry force with no CAVs. His was a combined arms force that focused on taking out hard targets with some anti-soft capability. To be specific:

 

13th Regiment, Tchinn Ong tribe (Rach, No Mercy doctrine):

 

Mech Inf

Bear x3

Armored Rifle Team with Assault x3

Satchel Charges x6

 

Mech Inf

Badger x2

Rifle Team with Assault x6

Satchel Charges x6

 

Rifle Section

Rifle Team with AT-23, FiST, and Infantry, Drop upgrades x6

 

Flight Section

Barracuda x2

 

Flight Section

Kharl w/ Reactive Armor and Orbital Insertion x2

 

Strikes

Atomic WMD Cruise Missile :devil:

Artillery Bomabardment

Orbital Pinpoint Strike x2

Smoke x5 (used 4)

 

Forlorn Hope (Ritterlich, Hunter's Edge doctrine):

 

Armor Section

Dictator 60 x2

Falcon

Sabertooth

Puma w/ EST/2

Nomad

 

Mech Inf

Lynx x2

Rifle Team x2

Rifle Team w/ FiST

RIfle Team w/ AT-23

Satchel Charge x4

 

Mech Inf

Same as above

(I'm not 100% about the upgrades for the mech inf sections as they didn't get used other than satchel charges)

 

Specialist

Ghast x2

 

Recon

Stiletteo x2

Nomad

Puma

 

Flight

Dragonfly x2

 

Mortar

Armored Heavy Mortar Team x3

 

Strikes

Cruise missile x2

Smoke x2

(there may have been more, but that's what got used)

 

The game was played on a 4x6 table lengthwise with buildings, trees and a handful of hills densely packed a the center and opening up at either end with just a couple hills, most only large enough to hide dismounted infantry. Forgot to take pictures, and to be honest, I still need to unload pictures from our last game in March.

 

Ok, first, let me say that I love only having to spend 25 points for drop infantry per stand rather than 65. That freed up a lot of points that used to do something I don't usually do, max out my spending on strikes. In turn two, they dropped in behind the OPFOR, five of the six called in strikes, then all six fired AT-23s. On stand called in an Atomic WMD Cruise missile which detonated in the middle of the recon section, one of the Dragonflies, the Ghasts, and one Lynx which resulted in the removal of a Nomad, a Dragonfly, and a Ghast, and placing a single point of damage on a Stiletto, one on the Puma, and a Lynx. Don't know that I inflicted 500 points with just that strike, but I think the psychological impact was as good as the actual damage inflicted. The two Orbital Pinpoint strikes were also used. One on the Puma in the Armor Section and on a Dictator 60 which had been damaged in turn 1 by the Artillery Bombardment. The dice pooped out against the Dictator, but wiped out the Puma. The other two were smokes. Then they fired AT-23s, three at the damaged Lynx carrying infantry and three at the damaged Dictator. The Lynx went down with all hands and the Dictator suddenly found itself on it's fourth DT. However, by the end of the game the whole section was wiped out thanks to mortar fire and an attack run by the Armor section's Nomad. But they were responsible for what some would call a war crime, killing a Puma and a Dictator 60, and putting the hurt on a Sabertooth. Alot of fun for and additional cost of 80 points per stand and the cost of the strikes. Need to try this with Armored Rifle Teams next time around.

 

Some general comments regarding the changes in RC08:

 

1) Cruise missiles, they move faster, but are much easier to kill. We didn't kill any in the game, but I will definitely be more careful in choosing when to use them and where they fly.

 

2) Strikes. As I said before, I don't know that I got 500 points out of it, but the WMD cruise missile was a lot of fun to use. Smoke almost seems to random to be of use. If drift were reduced by 4" instead of 2" I think I'd be more agreeable with it. I had one smoke strike drift so far of it was of more use to FH than to me. If I'm spending my points, I don't want it help my opponent no matter how nice a person he is IRL. Cost changes to most of the other stuff didn't really seem to impact that much other than the old multiples of 50 paradigm was much easier to calculate in my head.

 

3) While we've been effectively using the same IA resolution procedures for some time now, I can see that with the general increase in RAVs across the board IA is going to become a big discouragement to the CAV Phalanx. The mortar teams emphasized how much more accurate IA fire is now, he just had bad luck on the dice rolls that cause damage. May need to roll out the Conquerors more often, especially since they actually got cheaper.

 

4) Close Combat feels about as right as I think it can be made. Though RC08 need to include a clarification on firing at models in B2B or models in B2B firing out. Specifically whether or not it's allowed. I'll take a look again, but don't think it is mentioned anywhere.

 

5) Using Hunter's Edge when you already have an initiative card advantage is just plain cruel if you're on the receiving end. Good thing I had that WMD, it made removing his initiative cards easier. OK, that really wasn't a comment on RC08, but I needed to get that out there. Though on the other hand, a Dictator 60 going from one point of damage to destroyed thanks to two teams of Rach Rifle Teams with satchel charges probably isn't very nice either. :devil:

 

That's all I can think of at the moment, I'm starting to get tired and my decongestant is starting to wear off. If I missed something we discussed during the game hopefully Forlorn Hope will come on and hit the spots I missed. It was a very enjoyable game that wasn't decided until the bitter end when out of 4000 points all that was left on the table was a Badger and a Rifle Team with one point of damage each.

 

[/hugepost]

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...