New Stacking Rule Proposal
- Thread starter animus
- Start date
CZuschlag
Mongoose
But that also violates the rules as stated, and the spirit of the game:
Rules as Stated --- You can place up to four flights as an escort on any one ship or one to any auxiliary craft. Such a flight is stacked with the object it is escorting (SFoS, pg. 11).
Spirit of the Game --- it is established that smaller base size is an advantage, as ship bases cannot overlap. Games can easily be cited where the number of bases that can fit within a given range of a target has been a determining factor. Some races have this happen more than others (Drazi and Dilgar being chief offenders, Abbai and Drakh are close behind). Therefore, we have a situation where the value of a ship isn't constant between games, it depends on how much you coutner/mini's base is. This violates the idea that a Ka'Tan is always a Ka'Tan.
ACtA is still plagued with this base sizing issue. Animus is just proposing the resolution that costs the smallest economic impact. I don't agree with it, personally -- I think the game is more interesting with the restrictions -- but it's at least logically consistent and avoid the two issues above.
Rules as Stated --- You can place up to four flights as an escort on any one ship or one to any auxiliary craft. Such a flight is stacked with the object it is escorting (SFoS, pg. 11).
Spirit of the Game --- it is established that smaller base size is an advantage, as ship bases cannot overlap. Games can easily be cited where the number of bases that can fit within a given range of a target has been a determining factor. Some races have this happen more than others (Drazi and Dilgar being chief offenders, Abbai and Drakh are close behind). Therefore, we have a situation where the value of a ship isn't constant between games, it depends on how much you coutner/mini's base is. This violates the idea that a Ka'Tan is always a Ka'Tan.
ACtA is still plagued with this base sizing issue. Animus is just proposing the resolution that costs the smallest economic impact. I don't agree with it, personally -- I think the game is more interesting with the restrictions -- but it's at least logically consistent and avoid the two issues above.
you know I have never had the problem of ships trying to sit on top of each other. but then most the time I am not trying to get right in someones face in case they explode, unless its a ship i expect of mine to expode.
base sizes or counter sizes have never made the tiniest bit of differance in any game i have played.
base sizes or counter sizes have never made the tiniest bit of differance in any game i have played.
CZuschlag
Mongoose
If you have Fleet Action, it's rarely a problem. With the full-size/Mongoose figures, it's a different story. When you are trying to get 4 Targraths in Pulsar range in the same F arc of a Battle-Level ship, base size can be a big deal. We encounter the issue normally once in ... oh .. 4 battles. It's a fairly common problem.
CZuschlag said:
I would agree 100% with CZuschlag, it IS an issue and a fairly common one, especially with swarm fleets jockeying for position and in-close brawlers. As a Shadow player, I have lost more than one game because an opponent has TACTICALLY moved ships to stop me placing a Shadow Ship / Hunter in a location that would have denied him the opportunity to fire. In one case using an adrift ship to do so :shock: was a bit strict (overlap was maybe 1mm if that and I was using a slightly bigger base than normal for added stability) but it is an issue none-the-less.
I have also encountered it using Drazi (especially the 5pt War tournament at ID gaming where smalled bases for my Strikehawks would have allowed me to get a lot more shots in I think!)
Several players in our local group use Fleet Action minis and have noted several times the tactical advantage that allows, not just base size but the generally lower / smaller ships allow them to get in closer without *bumping* each other.
I'm not saying it's a huge advantage usually but it remains an issue and it does come up fairly regularly when we play. Actually very surprised you haven't encountered that at all Katadder - play with many people that use counters and/or fleet action minis do you at all? :?:
Iain McGhee
Mongoose
I ended up using a bunch of foam blocks to place under the bases of the longer ships to allow them to be moved base-to-base with other models. Still don't allow stacking mind, other than as allowed for fighters, but I don't use the smallest base size for anything other than Hermes, Tethys and Shadow Scout models any more.
I've had the same problems with stacking in larger games, especially when you've got a lot of small, fast ships (notably the Drazi) where it'd definately be advantageous to use counters or small stands as you'd be able to get more shots at a particular target due to positioning. Usually end up having to split them into smaller groups attacking different targets with correspondingly less firepower directed against each. Although that's as much an issue with model size as it is with base size.
I've had the same problems with stacking in larger games, especially when you've got a lot of small, fast ships (notably the Drazi) where it'd definately be advantageous to use counters or small stands as you'd be able to get more shots at a particular target due to positioning. Usually end up having to split them into smaller groups attacking different targets with correspondingly less firepower directed against each. Although that's as much an issue with model size as it is with base size.
I have to agree with the majority here - base sizes are a medium sized issue that comes up with moderate frequency. My Abbail fleet really, really need lots of space and small bases for maximum effect. When I played Tank and his FA EA, he made several moves that would never have happened in a million years (flying Hyperions in amongst the Abbai swarm) if using full size bases. This is not a criticism of one style or the other but pointing out that it can have a large effect on the game and the tactics required.
I for one dislike stacking because of the physical implications of moving ships at the bottom of a stack and am hugely in favour of standardised base sizes. FA (etc.) ships can simply place their bases on circular papar/card to represent the bases and nothing is lost.
I for one dislike stacking because of the physical implications of moving ships at the bottom of a stack and am hugely in favour of standardised base sizes. FA (etc.) ships can simply place their bases on circular papar/card to represent the bases and nothing is lost.
standardised bases wont change a thing however.
think of some models, doesnt matter what size base you have on an adira you wont get near it with anything less than fleet action or counters as the model is so large - this has nothing to do with base size.
it can also be applied to some other models too.
as you always have to get near the stem anyway and the base doesnt count for anything in game other than you cannot move there. although this is more for protection of some models than for anything else. if i put my primus on a large base you still cant get any closer to it than if its on the base its on now, because the model is quite large.
think of some models, doesnt matter what size base you have on an adira you wont get near it with anything less than fleet action or counters as the model is so large - this has nothing to do with base size.
it can also be applied to some other models too.
as you always have to get near the stem anyway and the base doesnt count for anything in game other than you cannot move there. although this is more for protection of some models than for anything else. if i put my primus on a large base you still cant get any closer to it than if its on the base its on now, because the model is quite large.
I'm toying with the idea of using my models but when things get tight, to either move to stackable chits or move to a different scale map (chits better).
There should be a limit on stacking; it's not a tactic I want to introduce into the game, but I don't like the amount of "space" a ship takes up. We're constantly bumping into each other. I'm terrified to play my Poseidon - it'll take up half the table!
There should be a limit on stacking; it's not a tactic I want to introduce into the game, but I don't like the amount of "space" a ship takes up. We're constantly bumping into each other. I'm terrified to play my Poseidon - it'll take up half the table!
CZuschlag
Mongoose
But Katadder, it will. It will establish, effectively, a right to use these foam stands that Ian is talking about, or establish a right to a proxy substitution like Triggy is mentioning. But the current solution isn't one -- it's sort of an ostrich's solution, sticking one's head in the sand.
I'm surprised that it hasn't been mentioned that there will be yet another issue when the newer flight stands come out; as has been mentioned, the small stands will have a bigger base than they used to.
I'm surprised that it hasn't been mentioned that there will be yet another issue when the newer flight stands come out; as has been mentioned, the small stands will have a bigger base than they used to.
CZuschlag
Mongoose
Without referencing bases, how are we to resolve the following rule?
(Revised, Book 1, Page 6, Section 3, Paragraph 5): "Ships may never be stacked on top of one another. You may never end your movement 'on top' of another ship or auxiliary craft."
?
Animus' suggestion is to throw up our hands and call the rule unworkable --- possible, I suppose! It certainly would be a firepower boost to Auxiliary Craft, I guarantee you that.
(Revised, Book 1, Page 6, Section 3, Paragraph 5): "Ships may never be stacked on top of one another. You may never end your movement 'on top' of another ship or auxiliary craft."
?
Animus' suggestion is to throw up our hands and call the rule unworkable --- possible, I suppose! It certainly would be a firepower boost to Auxiliary Craft, I guarantee you that.
With auxiliary craft we've adopted the rule that 2 flights per arc within 2" range are all that's allowed so stacking isn't an issue. You can just say they're there. If you can't stack on the bases, then it's a real problem.
Our issue is that we like models. We're miniature gamers - model first, play second. We don't like being penalized for making stable bases for our models.
Our issue is that we like models. We're miniature gamers - model first, play second. We don't like being penalized for making stable bases for our models.
