Garrisons on Overwatch |
|
zak
|
Post subject: Garrisons on Overwatch  Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 6:41 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 11:57 am
Posts: 104
Location: Irvine , Ayrshire ,Scotland
|
|
It was pointed out in the old SG forum by the Siege masters champion that there was a problem with Sentry (garrison on overwatch ) with the Siege masters list.
I proposed a limit of one formation per 1000 points (or part thereof).
?So limiting a 2700 pt force to 3 formations on Sentry.
Would that have been a severe limitation ?
_________________
"The Emperor Protects"
.........Commissar Zak
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
nealhunt
|
Post subject: Garrisons on Overwatch Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 7:09 pm |
|
| Purestrain |
 |
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
|
I would be willing to test that.
_________________
Neal
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: Garrisons on Overwatch Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:01 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
| Quote (nealhunt @ 14 Nov. 2005 (16:09)) | |
6xBig Guns w/ Zzap upgrade (6x175 = 1050)
Stompa, Kan, Warboss (250)
4xBlitz w/Zzap upgrade (4x200 = 800)
9 FB (450)
3 FB (150)
_12_ activations. 7 Garrisons. 10 TKd3 Weapons.
|
A 2700 point tourny then... Tau are in awe of your MW TKd3 goodness!
Sounds like the opponents wer caught off guard some. I wonder if they would have changed their lists going into a tourny like this knowing what the orcs can do to them? Did they feel at a loss with a response to this?
I just wonder if the results weren't somewhat skewed in that others were blindsided with the possibilities. Knowing the possibilities now, would the next event turn out the same?
So were the results a matter of them not being able to deal, or not expecting your tactic thus unprepaired?
Exagerated example:
Enemy fliers, armor, and/or WE's are completely overwhelming if you go to the battle ready for infantry only targets.
So a second tourny with all more aware of the possibilities might change the results.
In the end though, if ow garrisons create to much impact to the actual 'game' mechanics and tactics, then that is the real problem to me.
Free activations with no chance of failure have problems in my book.
It might even be worth it to allow all garrisons have the option to test for overwatch - but success is only on a 4+ regardless of strategy... failure means blast marker to start first turn. I think an element of unpredictability needs to be instilled, and *possibly* and element of penalty needs to be adopted as well.
Just some thoughts.
Cheers for the post Neal,
_________________
Rob
|
| Top |
|
|
|
nealhunt
|
Post subject: Garrisons on Overwatch Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:20 pm |
|
| Purestrain |
|
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
Yes, they were caught off guard. I think pretty much any extreme list like that will do so in a tourney. To be fair, at least one of the forces had the exact right weaknesses to exploit. (IG w/ Warlord Titan, Russ Company, HQ, and 2 infantry formations - target rich and nothing fast to get to my line without being shredded.)
Nonetheless, even an extreme list should have a chance of being beaten by a well-rounded list because a well-rounded list should be able to pick a tactic/strategy that is effective enough to have a chance.
Personally, I can't see that here. There are definitely armies that would have been a problem, but the only really threatening forces I can think of are other specialty forces.
===
Incidentally, it was 13 activations, not 12 - ~207 pooints per formation. Heh.
_________________
Neal
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Markconz
|
Post subject: Garrisons on Overwatch Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 1:23 am |
|
| Purestrain |
|
 |
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand
|
|
Nealhunt - 10 zzap guns, 12 Fighta Bombas, and 13 activations at 2700 points?! I think that list is an issue here, as much as any overwatch issue... that is a very nasty list against almost anything bar an infantry horde I think (regardless of whether you are using the OW rule or not).
I've always had an issue with how orks can take hidden super-weapons in their units - especially the zzap gun which is very powerful.
What armies did you face, and what was their composition?
Also what do you think about the currently tabled proposal (see the CAP thread) which has a -1 initiative check for garrisons and fighters?
Anyway thanks for the report!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Baduin
|
Post subject: Garrisons on Overwatch Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:26 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 9:31 pm
Posts: 34
|
|
My solution would be the following rule:
"Each garrison can declares pre-battle overwatch. Setting up in plain view on a battlefield is a risky decision, as enemy can subject you to pre-battle bombardment, spoiling attacks, air attack etc. To represent this roll a D6 for each unit in it overwatching formation. On a roll of a 1 the formation that the unit belongs to receives a Blast marker. After that, roll for initiative. If you pass, the formation is vigilant when the enemy comes and starts battle on overwatch. If you fail, they have grown careless. They get a blast marker as usual and start battle unactivated."
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
ortron
|
Post subject: Garrisons on Overwatch Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 2:29 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 1:48 pm
Posts: 681
Location: Australia
|
|
Hi all,
In our games we use all the experimental rules, so yes to OW for garrisons. To date i have not seen it to be a problem.. but then maybe no one has tried to make it so. I found without it, their was little point to garrisoning my marines, but that army always suffers from lack of range. I saw nids use it today actually to gain a cover save for some troops in the open, it felt right since you could imagine the broods lying in wait. Anyhow in our games the garrison units usually sit pretty tight and don't go to far, they tend to anchor the advance. I figure i can always hit them with arty or planes if they prove too tough.
Hasn't been a problem for us, yet.
thanks guys
ortron
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
nealhunt
|
Post subject: Garrisons on Overwatch Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 3:29 pm |
|
| Purestrain |
|
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
|
Markconz: Yes, it was an extreme list. I've been thinking of the tactic for a long time. I even detailed the multiple Gunz tactic and gave it a name - "popcorn" - in a draft of an article to be sent to Fanatic.
It won't work nearly as well without the OW. One of the major advantages is that on OW, the Orks fire normally without needing to roll an activation. The only way the army can move is double activations, which give it a -1 to hit. When it fires, it is usually an attempt at Sustain Fire but if you fail you pick up a blast marker and lose a shot. I did actually try in one game to "reset" the OW and gave up because it was readily apparent that it wasn't worth the failures.
==
Ortron: It took me a long time to get the hang of garrisons. It is a very complex balancing act where you are trying to gauge trade-offs with position, cover, vulnerability, etc.. For Orks, the main goal is to take as much territory as I can without becoming super vulnerable. My rough guideline is "if the enemy tries to hit this garrison, they will be close enough for me to counterattack."
Of course, that's with Orks and they are an attrition force, so using troops to bait the enemy is just fine with me.
I'm sure it would be significantly more problematic with SMs, but I have seen them use garrisons effectively.
_________________
Neal
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Markconz
|
Post subject: Garrisons on Overwatch Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:06 pm |
|
| Purestrain |
|
|
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand
|
| Quote (nealhunt @ 15 Nov. 2005 (13:29)) | Markconz: ?Yes, it was an extreme list. ?I've been thinking of the tactic for a long time. ?I even detailed the multiple Gunz tactic and gave it a name - "popcorn" - in a draft of an article to be sent to Fanatic.
It won't work nearly as well without the OW. ?One of the major advantages is that on OW, the Orks fire normally without needing to roll an activation. ?The only way the army can move is double activations, which give it a -1 to hit. ?When it fires, it is usually an attempt at Sustain Fire but if you fail you pick up a blast marker and lose a shot. ?I did actually try in one game to "reset" the OW and gave up because it was readily apparent that it wasn't worth the failures.
==
Ortron: ?It took me a long time to get the hang of garrisons. ?It is a very complex balancing act where you are trying to gauge trade-offs with position, cover, vulnerability, etc.. ?For Orks, the main goal is to take as much territory as I can without becoming super vulnerable. ?My rough guideline is "if the enemy tries to hit this garrison, they will be close enough for me to counterattack."
Of course, that's with Orks and they are an attrition force, so using troops to bait the enemy is just fine with me.
I'm sure it would be significantly more problematic with SMs, but I have seen them use garrisons effectively. |
Yes the failed activation roll will also mean that the zzap gun cannot shoot in the 45-60cm range bracket. On the other hand if the big gunz are also in range then you can try and sustain fire with few ill effects (provided you are not on overwatch).
What do you think of the -1 to initiative roll for garrisons (and aircraft), Ie half of ork units would fail. I don't think many other races have garrison units which cause problems like the orks can.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
ortron
|
Post subject: Garrisons on Overwatch Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 11:14 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 1:48 pm
Posts: 681
Location: Australia
|
|
Like i said earlier, I have yet to see it be a problem, HOWEVER i'm happy to admit that you guys may have a LOT more game experience than me.
If you feel it can be a "broken" rule then i believe you. I don't think removing it all together is an answer either. I would be willing to trial an activation roll, do we really need modifiers? Orks will still get a majority of units, but its not a sure thing.
I'm just a little unwilling to see the rule go or become too hard, otherwise many armies may not see the point in using garrison. Have their been problems with any other armies other than orks?
Cheers fellas
ortron
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
nealhunt
|
Post subject: Garrisons on Overwatch Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 11:15 pm |
|
| Purestrain |
|
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
It would definitely slow it down and just sticking my thumb in the air, it sounds about right. Even though I proposed a straight initiative check, I'd like to keep die rolls and modifiers to a minimum.
I think the easiest would be to limit garrisons based on points as has been proposed.
=====
Incidentally, there was another extreme Ork force at the tourney:
2 supastompa mobs
4 Landas loaded with Warband + nobz
It's incredibly nasty.
_________________
Neal
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
AndyH
|
Post subject: Garrisons on Overwatch Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 3:52 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 3:33 pm
Posts: 4
|
|
I remember talking about this issue on the old Epic Rules thread. We noticed that armies that had a lot of garrisons (sometimes orks, but especially siege IG), could easily abuse the overwatch-garrison rule.
I remember that we discussed a few options. Our group took on the following limitations, and they seemed to work really well. They gave a little bit of flavour to the game, made garrisoning a little more appealing (within reason), and they didn't cause balance problems.
One Overwatch-Garrison Per Objective (Sentries)
We used to call these overwatched garrisons "sentries". You could only have one sentry formation on each objective in your table half, and the sentries had to be within 15cm of that objective. Simple rule, but it prevents the "my whole army is on overwatch" situation.
Initiative Roll Required To Overwatch
We didn't like the fact that armies like Orks could overwatch so easily. After all, during a normal game, Overwatch is one of the more difficult actions for an Ork formation to take (they like double and engage). Therefore, once you have picked your sentry formations, we required those formations to make an initiative roll if they wanted to start on overwatch. This means that high-discipline forces like Space Marines could do it easily, while more wild/uncontrollable forces like Orks had a much harder time.
What do you think?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: Garrisons on Overwatch Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 5:30 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
AndyH,
I think the latter of your suggestions is closer to what I had in mind.
I would instill a -1 to the test and a blast marker generation to start the battle if failed.
The reason is that no garrison should be 'guranteed' to be doing what you wanted them too. Also, things go wrong in the field after you've been there a while. Alien critters and what not if not other enemy detected. Then there's potty breaks and sleepy eyes. Anyone who's spent any amount of time in a fox hole can describe the numerous distractions.
So the -1 represents the chance for _any_ army to lose focus over time of starting a battle off with OW.
The blast marker represents those hosts of distractions and the effects it will have on the formation that first turn...
"hurry up Brother Artemile, the enemy are upon us!"
"OK, ok - just having trouble with the Techpriest's latest upgrade, the automatic Toilet Paper dispensor is stuck!"
"For emporer's sake, I'm chaffing!"
 Cheers,
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
|
