Page 3 of 9

[ 124 posts ]

Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 9  Next

Titan weapon configurations
Tas	Post subject: Titan weapon configurations Posted: Mon May 05, 2003 3:57 am
Brood Brother Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:01 am Posts: 7823 Location: Sydney, NSW	Quote (pixelgeek @ 05 2003 May,09:36) Quote (Tas @ 04 2003 May,15:45) The other issue is that you are increasing the overall size of your force so it will take more BMs to break you. I'd rather increase the size of the formation by taking a Leman Russ platoon :-) This happened in a game last week and the Guard formations were damn tough. Ah yes...so would I! But here you can add on 2 vehicles for minimal cost without expending an upgrade option I read of your tale of Woe on the playtester site PG! _________________ Tas My General blog: http://tasmancave.blogspot.com/ My VSF Blog: http://pauljamesog.blogspot.com/ My ECW Blog: http://declaresir.blogspot.com/
Top

pixelgeek	Post subject: Titan weapon configurations Posted: Mon May 05, 2003 4:35 am
Brood Brother Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm Posts: 2642 Location: Edmonton, Alberta	Quote (Tas @ 04 2003 May,19:57) But here you can add on 2 vehicles for minimal cost without expending an upgrade option I can see that approach. It is cheaper but aside from transport (which you don't need) it adds less firepower than a tank You can also do both :-) I just think that the Chimera is going to be killed easier meaning that you're just adding more possible BMs to the formation whereas a Leman Russ is going to survive a heck of a lot longer. That said, you can't beat having even more units in the formation if it keeps the formation unbroken for an extra turn. _________________ Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.
Top

pixelgeek	Post subject: Titan weapon configurations Posted: Mon May 05, 2003 4:37 am
Brood Brother Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm Posts: 2642 Location: Edmonton, Alberta	Quote (Legion 4 @ 04 2003 May,19:45) So we play cover rules for AFVs, it's a simple fix. The main reason why I think cover for vehicles is out of the scope of the game is that you typically don't target individual units (despite some whinging about War Engines) but the formation. So in this sense the idea of taking the differing elevations of a vehicle and the unit firing on it is a bit too micro-scale where the game is very macro-scale. _________________ Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.
Top

Gandalf the Grey

Post subject: Titan weapon configurations Posted: Mon May 05, 2003 4:52 am

Brood Brother Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 4:23 pm Posts: 789 Location: Tampa, Florida

Well let's look at Epic and E-A. Epic is a Tactical game, one model = 1 vehicle or a 5 man fire team.  Let's look at the detail Jervis tried to put in E-A. He says based on his readings of Keegan and Marshal, he developed the "Fire Fight" rules, basically most Infantry battles take place at 300 meters of less.  The Burst Marker concept, an attempt at the replicating the affects of Suppressive Fire.  The Cross Fire rule, how flanking fire works on the tactical battlefield.  So what does any tactical commander always look for - Cover & Concealment. Cover makes a target harder to hit because he's behind something that stop projectiles, like a wall.  Concealment - it won't stop fire, but he can't hit what he can't see, like hiding in the jungle foliage.  So does Hull Down and vehicle cover come into a tactical game - I'd say Yes. Well said Legion, very well said.  So long as a single Leman Russ mini represents a single Leman Russ tank, much of what Jervis is trying to do and get us to ignore just isn't going to happen.  If a Leman Russ represented, lets say, 5 Leman Russes, then I could see us ignoring cover and what not.  So long as I move one mini at a time, and are concerned where it is on the battlefield as a unit, it is more a tactical game than a strategy game. I feel like sometimes Jervis is trying to make a 'Command and Conquer' game where you give a general order to a group of units and they go off and battle on their own.  Trying to simulate that using minis just doesn't work for me.  If Jervis can quote his favorite authors, point one out to me that stated that units couldn't fire at two seperate formations at once.  Actually, in doing so, that would mean the unit would be able to distinguish seperate formations in a body of mixed infantry and tanks, which is about as unlikely as you can get.   I think some sort of hull down rule should go into effect, just to give me more to think about as I am moving minis around the board. _________________ Please check out my website: http://www.system17.com

Top

Legion 4	Post subject: Titan weapon configurations Posted: Mon May 05, 2003 5:43 am
Brood Brother Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm Posts: 36989 Location: Ohio - USA	I see your point about that Macro vs. Mirco.  But I'm not talking about elevation differences, I'm talking about an AFV behind a wall (like the ruin bit that comes on the base sprue) or something like that.  But your point about micro vs. macro is an interesting way to look at it, I never considered that.  But that would be another reason why I'm not "hot" on the whole E-A system.  I'd like to read Gandalf's reply, but it did not download for me. This has happened before. Pixzel, maybe you can "quote" it for me, the quotes seem to come thru ?  Good discussion guys, this is what the forum all about.   _________________ Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
Top

pixelgeek	Post subject: Titan weapon configurations Posted: Mon May 05, 2003 6:10 am
Brood Brother Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm Posts: 2642 Location: Edmonton, Alberta	Quote (Legion 4 @ 04 2003 May,21:43) But I'm not talking about elevation differences, I'm talking about an AFV behind a wall (like the ruin bit that comes on the base sprue) or something like that. Interesting point. Not sure how that would effect the game. I'm trying to think back to what I've read about tank combat and I can't really think of anything that is applicable. Typically the firing unit is either trying to hide behind the wall or get next to the wall to fire over it :-) _________________ Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.
Top

pixelgeek

Post subject: Titan weapon configurations Posted: Mon May 05, 2003 6:18 am

Brood Brother Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm Posts: 2642 Location: Edmonton, Alberta

Quote (Gandalf the Grey @ 04 2003 May,20:52) Well said Legion, very well said. ??If a Leman Russ represented, lets say, 5 Leman Russes, then I could see us ignoring cover and what not. ?So long as I move one mini at a time, and are concerned where it is on the battlefield as a unit, it is more a tactical game than a strategy game. I feel like sometimes Jervis is trying to make a 'Command and Conquer' game where you give a general order to a group of units and they go off and battle on their own. ?Trying to simulate that using minis just doesn't work for me. ?If Jervis can quote his favorite authors, point one out to me that stated that units couldn't fire at two seperate formations at once. ?Actually, in doing so, that would mean the unit would be able to distinguish seperate formations in a body of mixed infantry and tanks, which is about as unlikely as you can get. ? I think some sort of hull down rule should go into effect, just to give me more to think about as I am moving minis around the board. So long as a single Leman Russ mini represents a single Leman Russ tank, much of what Jervis is trying to do and get us to ignore just isn't going to happen. I don't think he is getting us to ignore it so much as he is just not factoring it. I'll agree that the game still models single vehicles and people but  the firing system doesn't take individual lines of fire into account. If my formation can draw a line of fire to a target then the entire formation can fire. Its a level of abstraction above a game that has single units firing at other single units so unless you want to start adding more complicated firing rules you might have to do without vehicle cover. I feel like sometimes Jervis is trying to make a 'Command and Conquer' game where you give a general order to a group of units and they go off and battle on their own.

He is. Units break (although in a fairly predictable way), you can't target units your opponent allocates the hits and your suppression is handled outside your control. There is quite a lot outside your control.

Its still damn fun and it still has a lot of tactical opportunities involved, you just don't have the same type of control as you do in other games.

I think some sort of hull down rule should go into effect, just to give me more to think about as I am moving minis around the board.

You could always bring this up on the EpicA board and see what the reaction is. It isn't a very large change to the game so it might be conceivable that it could be added.

Aside from that, there isn't anything stopping you from adding it yourself. House rules are always a good thing :-)