New Playtest Pack V1.2
- Thread starter MongooseMatt
- Start date
Harry Lonsdale
Mongoose
Since the Claweagle is now a 2-fer, and 2-fers must be in a squadron, what happens to a Claweagle that is attached to an enemy ship? Its squadron mates have to stay within 6", it leaves the squadron, ...?
l33tpenguin
Mongoose
The whole two-fer thing just needs dumped. Just make a PL below patrol! Or make two-fers worth a patrol and balance them accordingly.
These new rules to balance two-fers are just clumsy and awkward.
These new rules to balance two-fers are just clumsy and awkward.
being narn and the only thing actually looking forward to was GQuan Fix and better rules for 2fers from 1.2 I was sadly disapppointed
I know we the players didnt come up with any brillant way of making the brick actually worth placing in a wall of battle
but we did come up with some better 2fer rules I thought
apparantly we werent vocal enough or post enough playtest results on this rule
but yes you have basically just added more probelms with the 2fer claw eagle, probably even more of a headache then the shokov/kos
drazi come in on a head on firing pass, claw eagle1 successfully boards a ship heading in the opposite direction, claw eagle 2 fails its opposed CQ check and now must do everything in its power to maintain squadron no matter how suicidal it is because according to the rules its not allowed to leave squadron
the whole point of this rule is to get rid of people init sinking, I appreciate that but you dont have to enforce crappy squadrons to do it
I believe we had to options that came out as best
1. In a Raid level or higher game during the movement phase if you activate an unsquadroned 2fer you must activate an additional ship or squadron
--thereby never allowing a single 2fer to sink, killing 1/2 a patrol point will reduce your sinking ships by 1
2. In a Raid level or higher game during the movement phase if you activate an unsquadroned 2fer you must activate an additonal unactivated and unsquadroned 2fer unless no such ship exists.
--I thought this was more fair to those of us stuck with the only option at patrol of a 2fer*, now it requires a whole patrol point of killing before you get rid of a sink
*I realize that for a patrol point I could get fighters, but lets be honest narn consider the shokov/kos their super duper hvy ftr of awesomeness, why would you get some crappy ftrs when you could get a patrol boat. theres a reason hanger conversion was put in the refits
on the other had I am glad to see the 4+ CBD gone, off to check the 6+Crit save to see if it will help anything.... oh wait the only ship that I would consider doing CBD and that it would actually help is the GQuan but ive given up on that particular piece of mortar
EDIT--post kind of looks really critical, Im happy to see work being done, just sad that none of it was on stuff I had an interest in
I know we the players didnt come up with any brillant way of making the brick actually worth placing in a wall of battle
but we did come up with some better 2fer rules I thought
apparantly we werent vocal enough or post enough playtest results on this rule
but yes you have basically just added more probelms with the 2fer claw eagle, probably even more of a headache then the shokov/kos
drazi come in on a head on firing pass, claw eagle1 successfully boards a ship heading in the opposite direction, claw eagle 2 fails its opposed CQ check and now must do everything in its power to maintain squadron no matter how suicidal it is because according to the rules its not allowed to leave squadron
the whole point of this rule is to get rid of people init sinking, I appreciate that but you dont have to enforce crappy squadrons to do it
I believe we had to options that came out as best
1. In a Raid level or higher game during the movement phase if you activate an unsquadroned 2fer you must activate an additional ship or squadron
--thereby never allowing a single 2fer to sink, killing 1/2 a patrol point will reduce your sinking ships by 1
2. In a Raid level or higher game during the movement phase if you activate an unsquadroned 2fer you must activate an additonal unactivated and unsquadroned 2fer unless no such ship exists.
--I thought this was more fair to those of us stuck with the only option at patrol of a 2fer*, now it requires a whole patrol point of killing before you get rid of a sink
*I realize that for a patrol point I could get fighters, but lets be honest narn consider the shokov/kos their super duper hvy ftr of awesomeness, why would you get some crappy ftrs when you could get a patrol boat. theres a reason hanger conversion was put in the refits
on the other had I am glad to see the 4+ CBD gone, off to check the 6+Crit save to see if it will help anything.... oh wait the only ship that I would consider doing CBD and that it would actually help is the GQuan but ive given up on that particular piece of mortar
EDIT--post kind of looks really critical, Im happy to see work being done, just sad that none of it was on stuff I had an interest in
Ike - I think I agree that the simplest way to enact the 2-for-1 ship rules would be as you say, for every 2-for-1 ship activated in the movement or shooting phase (or other phase for that matter) then at least one other 2-for-1 ship must be activated at the same time too (so long as there is at least one other ship on the board).
There are problems though if these ships are in separate squadrons - this would allow players to activate multiple squadrons at once and I can't really see a way round this other than changing the wording of the rule to "then at least one other ship must be activated at the same time too (you are allowed to count ships in the same squadron for this purpose).
There are problems though if these ships are in separate squadrons - this would allow players to activate multiple squadrons at once and I can't really see a way round this other than changing the wording of the rule to "then at least one other ship must be activated at the same time too (you are allowed to count ships in the same squadron for this purpose).
N
noobdelux
Guest
a nice fix would be to get rid of all 2 fers.... cause several of them are as good as anothers race`s 1 patrol ship
l33tpenguin
Mongoose
2 fers are moved in the fighter movement phase!
what happens when one is crippled/slowed/adrifted and cant keep up
or say you have 2 patrol so 4 ships in a squad and your opponenet has 2 actual patrol ships but they split up and you want to send 2 after each
or my personal favourite, you successfully manage a stand down and prepare to be boarded and just want to detach a single boat to guard it (or for that matter detach 2 from a squadron to do it)
current incarnation of rules state your not allowed to break squad unless the other ship is destroyed
which means I must make every effort to maintain squads no matter the condition of the ships, im not allowed to peel off from a 4 ship squad of 2fers because that would involve breaking 2 off and forming a new squad which only the gaim can do
enforcing a squadron when so many conditions exist in the game that can kill the squadron with out actually destroying the ships is, well call it what you want, i find it annoying as hell
this is what I atleast am trying to get away from
So as I see it, original problem: in higher PL games ie.Raid+, people are using single 2fers as ini sinks
current fix: enforce 2fers into squadron with something
additional issues: see above
Silashand-your particualr option falls under this one, enforcing a squad, just making the squad more limited in choice
suggested fix A: in movement phase, if activating a single 2fer you must also activate something else
additional issues:well besides misinterpretation of whats said I dont see any, kindly point any out if you do
suggested fix B: change current fleet lists to remove all 2fers
additional issues:besides the fact that PtB have not said anything on this suggestion(infact have possibly added another 2fer as of 1.2) and the fact that there will be large arguements over the changes, see Whitestar threads. I dont really see any gameplay issues with this one
suggested fix C(possibly new): Make them move in the figther phase
additional issues: swinging the pendulem to far, the original problem is not every one gets 2fers and people are using them for ini sinks, now your saying that people with only 2fers cant use patrol points to sink. Sinking will happen, the game is based on ini, there is going to be sinking, just to line up bore sights. we are trying to be ballanced not nerf the ships we are given
obviously I favour option A(actually a slight variation of A), its one rule, and elegant, not alot of work involved
or say you have 2 patrol so 4 ships in a squad and your opponenet has 2 actual patrol ships but they split up and you want to send 2 after each
or my personal favourite, you successfully manage a stand down and prepare to be boarded and just want to detach a single boat to guard it (or for that matter detach 2 from a squadron to do it)
current incarnation of rules state your not allowed to break squad unless the other ship is destroyed
which means I must make every effort to maintain squads no matter the condition of the ships, im not allowed to peel off from a 4 ship squad of 2fers because that would involve breaking 2 off and forming a new squad which only the gaim can do
enforcing a squadron when so many conditions exist in the game that can kill the squadron with out actually destroying the ships is, well call it what you want, i find it annoying as hell
this is what I atleast am trying to get away from
So as I see it, original problem: in higher PL games ie.Raid+, people are using single 2fers as ini sinks
current fix: enforce 2fers into squadron with something
additional issues: see above
Silashand-your particualr option falls under this one, enforcing a squad, just making the squad more limited in choice
suggested fix A: in movement phase, if activating a single 2fer you must also activate something else
additional issues:well besides misinterpretation of whats said I dont see any, kindly point any out if you do
suggested fix B: change current fleet lists to remove all 2fers
additional issues:besides the fact that PtB have not said anything on this suggestion(infact have possibly added another 2fer as of 1.2) and the fact that there will be large arguements over the changes, see Whitestar threads. I dont really see any gameplay issues with this one
suggested fix C(possibly new): Make them move in the figther phase
additional issues: swinging the pendulem to far, the original problem is not every one gets 2fers and people are using them for ini sinks, now your saying that people with only 2fers cant use patrol points to sink. Sinking will happen, the game is based on ini, there is going to be sinking, just to line up bore sights. we are trying to be ballanced not nerf the ships we are given
obviously I favour option A(actually a slight variation of A), its one rule, and elegant, not alot of work involved
Tolwyn said:
I hate how so many people say that, sure one of them can beat a gaim scout, but its a scout its fragile, the vree are most likely dead, but then everyone can do that if the vree doesnt have terrain
against everything else you would need 2 and the only haha checkmate wins are against the poor dilgar
l33tpenguin
Mongoose
How bout,
You must move at least 1 patrol point worth of ships at a time. If you move less than 1 patrol point, you must move a second ship.
No sinking, no weird squadron rules, no worry about splitting forced squadrons.
Fixed
You must move at least 1 patrol point worth of ships at a time. If you move less than 1 patrol point, you must move a second ship.
No sinking, no weird squadron rules, no worry about splitting forced squadrons.
Fixed
Why are you limiting this to raid+ games? People are using them as initiative sinks even in patrol PL games. I see no reason why any rule on moving ships together shouldn't apply to games of all sizes.Ike said:
I like the wording of having to activate at least one patrol FAP of ships at a time - it will still need careful wording but the principle is sound.
l33tpenguin
Mongoose
During your movement, you must move either single ship or full patrol point, which ever is greater. Squadrons and hunting packs are exempt from this rule
For ini sink or 2fers why not sometyhing along the following:
When assigned as a squadron at begining of game they will remain locked (not as a squadron but as a turn)
ie they all activate together whether they have bee split apart etc.
This might solve a few problems like the claweagle, one making crew check and boading and the other doesnt.
I not saying it perfect but it might lessen a few problems!
When assigned as a squadron at begining of game they will remain locked (not as a squadron but as a turn)
ie they all activate together whether they have bee split apart etc.
This might solve a few problems like the claweagle, one making crew check and boading and the other doesnt.
I not saying it perfect but it might lessen a few problems!
