Tactical Command | View topic - Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Page 3 of 6

[ 85 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

View unanswered posts | View active topics View unread posts | View new posts | View your posts

Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Chroma

Post subject: Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:51 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(Moscovian @ Feb. 01 2008,20:33)

QUOTE

But then what do you do if you CAN'T move out of the ZoC? ?Now there needs to be another line in the rules about this and that.

Well, that's something that's been a "hole" in the rules since the beginning, and should, probably, be a general rule not something specific to fearless

And, since broken troops making a withdrawal move, which the fearless troops can choose to take, can ignore enemy ZoCs, I think it's going to be highly irreguler for their to be a situation where they can't move to get out of them... unless ringed by scouts or something odd.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Top

Crabowl

Post subject: Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:53 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 12:44 pm
Posts: 123
Location: Finland

It's kinda odd that fearless units can be suppressed or broken. If they're really fearless they are not going to hide in the bushes after getting shot, they'll keep their heads up and shoot back. It is understandable that they take extra casualties when they're 'broken' since they just stand in the line of fire even when their friends are dying left and right.

So what if the rule would go something like this:

-----

2.1.3 Fearless
Some units are noted as being fearless. Such units are either exceptionally brave or so crazed that they will never run away even when broken (though you can choose to have them make a withdrawal move if you want them to).

Units that are fearless are immune to suppression from blast markers and are not automatically destroyed while being stationary within 15cms of the enemy. However, if they choose to withdraw, they are destroyed if they end their withdrawal move within 15cms of the enemy. Formations that contain only fearless units may take an action even while being broken. Note that fearless units still suffer additional hits for Blast markers while being broken or losing an assault (they're caught in the firefight and are too brave to run and hide).

-----

I dunno how good that would be, probably better than ATSKNF when the formation is entirely fearless and worse than ATSKNF in mixed formations.

Thoughts?

_________________
Gief more guns for less points!

Top

Moscovian

Post subject: Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:08 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA

the "don't have to withdraw" and "can't end in enemy ZoC" aren't contradictory; it also prevents the "broken charge" with a double against some other formations and just means, if they're stay near the enemy that broke them, they just have to back off slightly instead of the normal more than 15cm of non-fearless troops.

Your revision may mean that but it doesn't say that.

Ex. I have two Wraithlords and 2 Wraithguard in an enemy ZOC. I am broken because I lost my assault (and all my Guardians with it). I am in BtB contact with the enemy units.

I look at the rule and it says, "not needing to withdraw" so now I don't need to withdraw, "broken fearless units may not end an assault still in an enemy zone of control" okay I do need to withdraw since I am in the enemy ZoC.

It needs to be re-worded.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Top

Chroma

Post subject: Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:14 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(Moscovian @ Feb. 01 2008,21:08)

QUOTE

It needs to be re-worded.

Well, the final line is an "addendum" for special cases:

Finally, note that, despite not needing to withdraw, broken fearless units may not end an assault still in an enemy zone of control.

You do get the concept though, eh? *laugh* Let me know what you think of that Mr. Wordsmith...

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Top

Moscovian

Post subject: Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:32 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA

Mr. Wordsmith says... (BUZZER)

How about "Broken fearless units are only required to remain outside an enemy ZOC."
I am still trying to figure out what happens to them when they end up in in the ZoC. It isn't a big deal for non-fearless units because they are dead and can be removed. The situation is rare when non-fearless units find themselves in each other's ZOC at the beginnind of the turn.

With fearless units it can crop up a lot (it has in my games) where you force the assault because you are in their ZOC. This is at the crux of the complaints about fearless since players will manufacture this situation with the double-charge/retreat move. If you don't address it you will still have people freaking out over it for another 35 pages of forum text. It shouldn't be the broken charge/retreat that gets the attention but the ZOC issue itself.

Personally I can't think of anything that isn't wordy, hinky, and overly complex. The funny thing is I don't even think it needs to be fixed. Fearless units should be able to charge and make your life miserable even when broken. If they stay broken you just have to figure out a way around them since they can't do anything else except be in your way.

Perhaps these all fearless formations need to have their points re-evaluated rather than tweak a generally stable rule?

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Top

BlackLegion

Post subject: Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:42 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8711
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe

I think as all broken formations they have to make a withdrawal move. But if they end their move in the enemies ZoC (rather than within 15cm as nonFearless units) they are destroyed.

This would be the shortest, easiest and most elegant solution.

So the broken assault is impossible because they can't move/stay in basecontact and because of being broken can't lend supporting fire.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Top

Moscovian

Post subject: Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:46 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA

BL, I'd be fine with that if it makes everyone else happy. It would be a little rough on things like the Necron Pylon (with a move base of zero) but everyone hates that unit anyway so go for it.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Top

BlackLegion

Post subject: Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:55 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8711
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe

EDIT: Oops ignore this reply i was wrong in that i was going to answer

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Top

Chroma

Post subject: Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:57 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(BlackLegion @ Feb. 01 2008,21:55)

QUOTE

Units with a move of 0 are allways destroyed in a lost assault. Regardless if they are within 15cm of a enemy unit or not.

Not if they're fearless, which is the crux of Moscovian's point...

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Top

BlackLegion

Post subject: Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:59 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8711
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe

See above. I thought there was a rule that Speed 0cm units are always destroyed on a lost assault. There is no such rule.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Top

nealhunt

Post subject: Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 11:52 pm

Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA

(Moscovian @ Feb. 01 2008,20:33)

QUOTE

Has anyone played a game where the broken charging fearless formation won it for them? I'm just curious.

Oh, yeah. Lots of example games. It's nasty and makes you feel like you need a shower.

First time I had it used against me was with a Warlord titan supporting IG. A completely crazy army - tricked out Rg HQ, tricked out Russ Co, Warlord, and a couple smaller formations that hid at the back - it had 5 or 6 activations at 3000 points, but each one was like a Uge Ork warband, with better armor saves. I picked off the Warlord because it was the easiest to break (only 8 BMs) only to have it charge into base contact, followed by token assaults to draw in the Warlord. And, of course, since the Warlord is in base contact, all hits go to it first, meaning even the most token of token assaults works just fine.

Several times I faced an Eldar army with a Warlock titan that was designed specifically to use the withdraw charge.

Warlock Titan
2-3 Storm Serpents
Guardians
2-3 Aspect hosts
AA armor formations
Gate
Avatar

Fill in with bikes.

Charge the titan right up the enemy's bung. It's too fast to avoid. Follow on with everyone else, crushing everything in the vicinity. If you don't break the titan, it can usually shoot/support/support or engage/support/support with the Farsight activations. If you do break the titan, it usually still gets 2 of the three "actions" it normally would because it can still charge into base contact.

The first time I faced this army, I made the grave error of breaking the Warlock titan after it had activated, so it got the equivalent of _4_ activations in one turn.

I used it with the Thousand Sons when I started playtesting them. Just few 4+RA saves at the front of an assault can make a huge difference. It's not as good as titan-based withdraw charges but it's a lot cheaper and goes a long way as well.

TRC used it in the now-infamous Decimator playtests. Even with the restriction on assault companies in the BL list, I think it would still be valid for them or the Deathwheels.

_________________
Neal

Top

nealhunt

Post subject: Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 11:54 pm

Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA

(Chroma @ Feb. 01 2008,20:51)

QUOTE

And, since broken troops making a withdrawal move, which the fearless troops can choose to take, can ignore enemy ZoCs, I think it's going to be highly irreguler for their to be a situation where they can't move to get out of them... unless ringed by scouts or something odd.

Ignoring ZoC doesn't allow you to pass over enemy units. For big WEs, it's not that hard to ring a unit to the point where it cannot escape.

_________________
Neal

Top

Chroma

Post subject: Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:12 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(nealhunt @ Feb. 01 2008,22:54)

QUOTE

(Chroma @ Feb. 01 2008,20:51)

QUOTE

Ignoring ZoC doesn't allow you to pass over enemy units. ?For big WEs, it's not that hard to ring a unit to the point where it cannot escape.

One would hope a war engine would kill *something* in the fight... *laugh*

I've never tried the "closely surround" thing for breaking an enemy before... might have to see if the Orks can pull it off.

It's just the "broken charge" against an univolved formation that is the problem. ?If the broken fearless units base their direct opponents, consolidation moves all the enemies to clear away from them. ?I honestly don't think the "broken charge" was an intended consequence for fearless units...

Perhaps "must attempt to remain out of enemy ZoCs" as a re-wording?

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Top

BlackLegion

Post subject: Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:15 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8711
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe

Perhaps "must attempt to remain out of enemy ZoCs" as a re-wording?

And if this is not possible they are destroyed.

I like it

With 3 or 4 units on the cardinal direction on a Warlord's base the warlord would be destroyed if he looses the assault, because the space between two units is to narrow to pass through.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Top

Chroma

Post subject: Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:24 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

(BlackLegion @ Feb. 01 2008,23:15)

QUOTE

With 3 or 4 units on the cardinal direction on a Warlord's base the warlord would be destroyed if he looses the assault, because the space between two units is to narrow to pass through.

Nope... Mr Warlord just steps over them... ignoring their ZoCs...

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Top

Print view

Previous topic | Next topic

Page 3 of 6

[ 85 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:

Alternate Fearless Rule Proposal

Who is online