Jump to content

CAV: SO Sneak Peek


Reaperbryan
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Reaper User

Thats one of the reasons we have the rules out before they go to final print. What makes sense to the people who look at it all the time might make someone else go wtf. We are taking all your comments and looking at where we can clean up the presentation or streamline our processes. We have had a lot of kids play the game at shows we have been at and havent had any problems with them picking it right up.

The cards are listing stuff you dont need to play but is there so people know the process they were built from. We are discussing a better way to do that but since there are no books similar to the old JoR out we dont have anywhere else to put out the info.

And yes the acronym system sucks and will be addressed.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Am I sick in the head? This looks on first read like a pretty fast and simple rule-set. A few numerical bonuses, roll, modify, that's it. Gives you hit and damage right away. Mark your card, and all damage effects are right there. How is that like BT?

 

For example, fire an LBX-20, once. Now you have to roll for hit locations 20 bleeding times. You may have to roll for criticals that many times. However many hit the cockpit, you have to roll for getting knocked unconscious that many times. Now you have to degrade and record armour at every location rolled. Congratulations! You fired ONE GUN. Oh, you have two of those? And a laser? On ONE MECH? Sorry, I forgot, you also have to accrue heat and record ammo usage. Okay, now fire the other one! Repeat, only now your opponent has to roll to fall over... and degrade armour, check for criticals, oh he hit a heat sink, better check his heat again...

 

This is awesome! I can't wait till that missile boat fires all four LRM-20s!

As someone with a Battletech background I agree. I love Alpha Strike but these rules look to be great. I won't make a final judgment until I've played a few games but from what I've read CAV:SO looks good. To be fair I've never played earlier versions of CAV so I can't judge there but I've been pushing minis around a table for a while and I like these rules.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It might not be as slick as CAV1 or CAV2, I haven't played those. But it seems pretty good, at least for 2-3 squads a side. Above that the process might kludge, but I don't know, I'd really have to play 3 or 4 games to know.

 

 

Comments:

 

The 2D6 seems to lock you into one figure moves, one figure fires, type play. No way you're going to roll for the whole squad like that. So that does put a limitation on the process and probably means you won't want to play crazy-big battles.

 

The data cards seem necessary per-figure. Do vehicles and squads also need them, or are they just for the CAVs? That's again going to influence maximum game size, but as far as book-keeping goes they're not too bad. Probably laminated plus a whiteboard marker would be the way to go for those, at the table. That being the case, a blank space to note the figures ID, number or name would be either really handy or essential.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Klat, almost all of us have a Battletech background here. I came to CAV because it was a streamlined game that focused on effects rather than simulation which allows the players to concentrate on their tactics rather than tracking individual systems and multiple hit locations. That and I liked the models better. This version to me seems to be sliding in the opposite direction.

 

Smokingwreckage, no it's not rolling for LBX-20 ACs but compared to what it was this CAV somewhere in between the older versions and BT. The "OMG we might as well play BT" hyperbole is based on the added complexity to the modifers, the data cards, and a bunch of little things liberally sprinkled throoughout the rules. CAV2 wasn't perfect, but it gives a darned good game without getting bogged down in the details.

 

How many models per person on those demo games with kids? Two? Four?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I can't compare it to older CAV versions, except on a read-through, which doesn't give you a good feel for the procedure. I'm just saying the procedure here looks and feels like it works pretty smoothly; while there are modifiers, everything gets resolved at once. Looking up stuff is a matter of book organisation and can be worked on; the procedure though is set in stone, pretty much.

 

I would like to know how many models the demo games ran with, as I have already observed, the dice mechanic alone sort-of locks you into individual move-and-fire. But the other thing that keeps this from scaling up past a certain point is the damage tracks. They've always been a feature, yes? What size game would CAV1 run to, assuming both sides ran heavy on the mechs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About 12 models per side in CAV1 and 2. Assuming all CAVs.

 

I get what some of you are saying because there is more stuff to look at and factor in but Smoking Wreckage does hit upon a solid point as well. The mechanic is still basically find all my mods +/-, add my RAV, add my 2d6 roll, check MOS, determine damage (which is very solid, There is a to hit component thrown in for the range but it's pretty basic). That was almost exactly like CAV 1. So let's try and address things like Vil pointed out. If the weapons Hard and Soft degrade equally why list Piercing in that way. We have a chance here to tweak, poke and prod these rules to make them a solid set.

 

 

CAVboss is there a way to determine which SAs are already figured into the datacard stats and which are not?

Edited by ladystorm
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

smokingwreckage, all units have a datacard, including vehicles and infantry. In CAV 2, it was usually only necessary to have one copy of the card for all identical models, which generally leaves you with one or maybe two pages depending on how many unique models you have. The CAV:SO datacards are quite a bit larger, however; I could fit 9 CAV 2 datacards on a page, and I'm not sure I could get more than 4 CAV:SO cards without shrinking them to the point of illegibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cards are listing stuff you dont need to play but is there so people know the process they were built from. We are discussing a better way to do that but since there are no books similar to the old JoR out we dont have anywhere else to put out the info.

 

Ah, I can understand that.

 

Perhaps have one part of the data sheet dedicated to fluff elements?  For example, organize everything that can be essentially ignored in-game in one section, while listing only in-game effects in another.  Pick names for those two sections to make a very clear distinction between in-game stuff and out-of-game stuff.

 

Personally, I'd prefer abilities that only modify statistics to be directly incorporated into those stats, for less modifiers to remember in-battle.  They could get a mention in the out-of-game fluff elements section though, if you want to give players a heads-up on how those final stats were calculated.

Edited by Jeneki
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Humble suggestion...

 

The page background makes my eyes sad. It's hard to read the rules with that textured background. Everything around it is fine, like the rusty diamond-plate border. The text area, though, looks like someone took a hack "brushed metal" Photoshop tutorial on the web a little too seriously. Just use plain white or a 10% gray or bluefish gray, maybe dirty the edges and around the corner bolts a bit. Please and thank you.

 

Full disclosure: trained graphic designer

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please!  As a person with eyesight issues I can't tell you how hard it can be to read some of the 'Easy Reference' cards that game companies put out.  I can't even read WarMachine's cards!  I really look forward to enlarging your very basic cards and printing them out, then laminating them for ease of use.  :)

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...