Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Playtesting
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=33498		 Page 2 of 3
Author:  mordoten [ Wed Aug 01, 2018 2:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Playtesting
I agree with Kyussinchains on what the Gargants list can be. I don't think the epic ruleset is designed to work for that kind of list.
Author:  Vaaish [ Wed Aug 01, 2018 5:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Playtesting
We run into this to some degree with the AMTL list too and I think it's accentuated with the Gargant list in part due to some of the DC stats on the larger gargants making it even tougher for folks to deal with the lists unless they pack masses of AV and MW.

I'd really like to see some form of degridation mechanic on war-engine heavy lists myself. Potentialy a SR that limits what they an shoot or some form of "crippled" effect that halves firepower or prevents them from contesting objectives.
Author:  kyussinchains [ Wed Aug 01, 2018 10:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Playtesting
I was talking with MikeT about this earlier, having war engines count as a number of units equal to remaining DC rather than starting DC or similar would help

Alternatively we could possibly take a leaf from warmaster monsters, wherein if a qualifying WE takes more than half damage it is considered badly damaged and only counts as a number of units equal to half starting DC

Those are just spitballing really, I think having 1-3 gargants to deal with in your half and another sat on the blitz is a tough prospect and many armies simply don't have the tools to deal with that much fearless DC with 4+RA
Author:  mordoten [ Thu Aug 02, 2018 9:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Playtesting
kyussinchains wrote:
I was talking with MikeT about this earlier, having war engines count as a number of units equal to remaining DC rather than starting DC or similar would help


This is a pretty neat way of fixing the gargant problem! I like it!
Author:  StevekCole [ Sat Aug 04, 2018 5:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Playtesting
Norto wrote:
Cole puts his hand up for eldar?


Happy to take that on if no-one else is.
Author:  StevekCole [ Sat Aug 04, 2018 5:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Playtesting
kyussinchains wrote:
I was talking with MikeT about this earlier, having war engines count as a number of units equal to remaining DC rather than starting DC or similar would help

Alternatively we could possibly take a leaf from warmaster monsters, wherein if a qualifying WE takes more than half damage it is considered badly damaged and only counts as a number of units equal to half starting DC

Those are just spitballing really, I think having 1-3 gargants to deal with in your half and another sat on the blitz is a tough prospect and many armies simply don't have the tools to deal with that much fearless DC with 4+RA


Really like the idea of using the warmaster mechanic. That’s also just easier to keep track of!
Author:  Mrdiealot [ Sun Aug 05, 2018 3:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Playtesting
I really like the idea of the Warmaster mechanic as well. It has the virtue of having no impact on WE with 2 DC, relatively minor impact on WE with 3 DC, and then scales nicely from there on. I guess half starting DC would be rounded upwards?

I think I'll try out the rule in the Traitor Titan Legion first. Got a game coming up this week where we could test it.
Author:  Mrdiealot [ Sun Aug 05, 2018 5:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Playtesting
This is the rule formulation that intend to test:

"Crippling War Engine Damage

War Engines that suffers damage that exceeds 1/2 starting Damage Capacity counts as having a new starting Damage Capacity of 1/2 (rounded up). This can only happen once per game. E.g. a War Engine with a starting Damage Capacity of 7 that suffers 4 damage gets a new Damage Capacity of 4. If it were to suffer another 3 damage it will still have a Damage Capacity of 4."
Author:  Mrdiealot [ Mon Aug 06, 2018 1:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Playtesting
One exception that is probably needed is that of how many units can be in base to base with the WE in close combat. And there are probably plenty of other weird effects that I haven't thought of. So I'm leaning towards playtesting something like this:

"Crippling Damage: War Engines that suffers damage that exceeds 1/2 starting Damage Capacity counts as having a Damage Capacity of 1/2 (rounded up) for the purposes of determining the number of blast markers the WE can have before it becomes broken and for determining how many Close Combat and/or Fire Fight dice it gets to roll. For all other purposes it counts as having the normal number of DC.

E.g. a War Engine with a starting Damage Capacity of 7 that suffers 4 damage gets a new Damage Capacity of 4 that applies to blast markers, Fire Fight and Close Combat dice. If it were to suffer another 3 damage it would not suffer any additional negative effects."
Author:  jimmyzimms [ Mon Aug 06, 2018 9:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Playtesting
Good call on that. Barging and b2b restrictions are often a function of the physical size of the unit (even if that mass.has gaping holes and on fire ;D )
Author:  mordoten [ Wed Aug 08, 2018 6:17 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Playtesting
Yeah, this sounds interesting. Could be a good way to make the Gargant list more enjoyable to meet also.
Author:  Mrdiealot [ Wed Aug 08, 2018 10:17 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Playtesting
Yeah, I think it's got potential. Not sure if the reduced DC should apply to something else apart from Blast Markers, CC and FF dice?
Author:  Mrdiealot [ Wed Aug 08, 2018 10:58 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Playtesting
Perhaps it would also be interesting to make the WE easier to kill as well as easier to break. Thinking about either making Crits more likely, or perhaps a -1 in Armour save for being reduced to under half.
Author:  Abetillo [ Wed Aug 08, 2018 12:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Playtesting
Criticals more likely to happen sounds good for Eldar, Tau and Orks, but for Imperial and Tyranids will probably be frustrating to see one or two Titans being destroyed in the first turn just from one point of damage twice as easily, so in my opinion sounds better for Imperial Titans for example to change the reactor repair from 4+ to 5+. It would still make reactor fusion more normal but at least would be on the second turn, and would degrade the Titan faster.
Could be done only on Warlord and Imperator class Titan size to make them more common after reducing their cost and also as they are the ones that gives the most issues about the number of games won by points.

The problem i see is that it would need to all of the lists to be changed or create a new special army rule or a new name for each unit. The other that it should be restricted to DC5+ as those are the ones that give problems, to avoid having to keep track of many small WE.

Mrdiealot wrote:
Yeah, I think it's got potential. Not sure if the reduced DC should apply to something else apart from Blast Markers, CC and FF dice?

Sounds right to only apply to those, save maybe could be considered to add also to the formation size for combat resolution, as the wounded doesn't intimidate as much as the lively.

Vaaish wrote:
[...] I think it's accentuated with the Gargant list in part due to some of the DC stats on the larger gargants making it even tougher [...].
.

I think that we should also consider here the random number of shields Gargants get. Seeing a Great Gargant with 7 shields is Ok as it is a lot of points and cannot be repaired but one with the maximum 12 everyone will try to avoid. If there is two Gargants or Great Gargants like that (and i played games when it happened), then the opponent sees no way out of it, panics and won't play as seriously turning the game from a tight one into a win by points and most probably turn 3 win, which have happened before several times from my records. It is not an issue with Ghazghkull's but on OGBM i think it is.

Could be fixed by changing the shields on Great Gargants from 6+1D6 to 9 or 6+1D3 and lower the cost by 25 or 50 points. That would also help in seeing more Great Gargants in Ghazghkull's list at 3000 points by making possible the option of GG + Landa. Would be worth testing.
Author:  Kyrt [ Fri Aug 10, 2018 9:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Playtesting
Did you intend the damage capacity halving to also apply to, err, capacity for damage? As titans can repair damage.
Page 2 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/