Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
Proposed rule amendment for Flyer rules http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=172&t=28972 |
Page 1 of 4 |
Author: | MagnusIlluminus [ Sun Feb 01, 2015 9:36 pm ] |
Post subject: | Proposed rule amendment for Flyer rules |
As per the discussion over in the Tau army list thread, I am proposing a change to the rules for Flyers & Floaters for NetEpic Gold. As this sub-forum may get more people to see it and discuss it, I'm putting it in here as well. The Proposal is that Flyers & Floaters should be able to target Flyers & Floaters without penalty or restriction. Well, so long as they are in the air anyway. If landed, they should be as restricted as any other model. This is because, at least in Earth-culture, the best defense against enemy aircraft is your aircraft. Specifically it would be an addition to the "Hard Target" portions on pages 24 & 26 of the Core Rules pdf. Page 24 would be changed from: "6) Hard Targets: Only Infantry-class models on First Fire Orders and AA models may fire at Floaters that are in the air (high or low altitude). Psykers on First Fire Orders may use their abilities as normal." to: "6) Hard Targets: Only Infantry-class models on First Fire Orders, and AA models may fire at Flyers & Floaters that are in the air (high or low altitude). Psykers on First Fire Orders may use their abilities as normal. Flyers & Floaters in the air may target other Flyers & Floaters with any weapon other than those described as being dropped during movement." Page 26 would be changed from: "8) Hard Target: Flyers are a difficult target to shoot for non dedicated AA models. To represent this only certain models may target flyers, the model must be on First Fire orders, and it suffers a -1 penalty to hit. The following models may target flyers: - Infantry, Cavalry, Walkers, Light Artillery, Knights, Titans The following models face the further restriction in that they may only target flyers with Turreted weapons or those listed as having 360 degree arc: - Vehicles, Floaters, Praetorians" to: "8) Hard Target: Flyers are a difficult target to shoot for non dedicated AA models. To represent this only certain models may target flyers, the model must be on First Fire orders, and it suffers a -1 penalty to hit. The following models may target flyers: - Infantry, Cavalry, Walkers, Light Artillery, Knights, Titans The following models face the further restriction in that they may only target flyers with Turreted weapons or those listed as having 360 degree arc: - Vehicles, Floaters, Praetorians The following models may target Flyers & Floaters while airborne with any weapon that is not described as being dropped during movement: - Flyers" |
Author: | primarch [ Sun Feb 01, 2015 10:10 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed rule amendment for Flyer rules |
Hi! We'll see what the general response is, but at least to me this looks good. Primarch |
Author: | scream [ Wed Feb 04, 2015 8:58 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed rule amendment for Flyer rules |
Hi all, I suppose that flyers weapon arc of fire should still apply ? (180° front). About the floaters, they already have a 360° arc of fire as stated in their rule 2) (page 24 for standard rules, page 25 for alternate rules). I like the idea that flyers could shoot at other flyers with a -1 to-hit penalty. |
Author: | MagnusIlluminus [ Wed Feb 04, 2015 10:37 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed rule amendment for Flyer rules |
I'm not proposing to change any fire arcs, just to allow Flyers (and in the rules on page 24, Floaters) to be allowed to target other Flyers & Floaters. Admittedly, the rules on page 26 already allow Floaters to target Floaters & Flyers, so it's less of an adjustment there. The way I phrased my proposed change above, Flyers would not take the -1 penalty to hit for targeting Flyers or Floaters, as that only applies to the group that includes Infantry and only in the rules on page 26. If only using the rules on page 24, then nobody takes a -1 to hit Flyers. At least, that's my understanding of how it breaks down. Perhaps what I'm proposing might be clearer if in the following order: [I also added a bit for clarity.] Page 26 could be changed to read: "8) Hard Target: Flyers are a difficult target to shoot for non dedicated AA models. To represent this only certain models may target flyers. Any model that has weapon(s) with the AA ability may target Flyers & Floaters as described in the description of the AA ability, but only with the weapon(s) that have the AA ability. The following models may target Flyers & Floaters while airborne with any weapon that is not dropped during movement: - Flyers The following models must be on First Fire orders, and they suffer a -1 penalty to hit. - Infantry, Cavalry, Walkers, Light Artillery, Knights, Titans The following models face the further restriction in that they may only target flyers with Turreted weapons or those listed as having 360 degree arc: - Vehicles, Floaters, Praetorians" |
Author: | The Bissler [ Wed Feb 04, 2015 11:29 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed rule amendment for Flyer rules |
This all looks good to me Magnus. ![]() |
Author: | primarch [ Thu Feb 05, 2015 1:11 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed rule amendment for Flyer rules |
Hi! I'll leave this open another week or so, if there are no objections it gets passed. ![]() Bissler mind linking this to the facebook group? Primarch |
Author: | Irisado [ Fri Feb 06, 2015 4:29 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed rule amendment for Flyer rules |
I approve of the proposed changes. It makes sense to me to allow flyers and floaters the option of targeting each other. |
Author: | scream [ Mon Feb 09, 2015 9:59 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed rule amendment for Flyer rules |
On my side, I feel a bit concerned about this small change that will result in big differences on the game. With current rules, Flyer vs Flyer is supposed to be resolved by close combat (aka Dog Fight) but the actual "meta-game" does not really allow dog-fight to happen. By allowing flyers to shot at other flyers without penalty, this will totally change the balancing. Why picking a ground AA when your bombers can do the job with a better efficiency ? Why bombers should be better at shooting at your fighters, in my imagination, flyers are supposed to be superior vs bombers, am I wrong ? About Floaters: At the moment, floaters can shot at flyers (with their 360° arc of fire ability stated in their description) when on first fire with a -1 to-hit, I'm not sure players would like to see Squats Overlords, Tzeentch Towers/Warp Palace or Harridans becoming great AA units... |
Author: | MagnusIlluminus [ Tue Feb 10, 2015 6:39 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed rule amendment for Flyer rules |
An interesting counter-point. Personally, my view is that allowing them to shoot at one another will help restore balance, but I have no evidence to back that up, so I'm really just guessing. Personally, I've never seen the logic behind using CAF to simulate "dogfights" partly because no Flyer is currently maneuverable enough to have them at Epic scale. At the scale involved with epic, the entire battle would be considered a "dogfight" when compared to real-world (and in-game maneuverability) anyway. In my view. CAF should be reverted to those rare times when the Flyer is at low altitude and gets charged by Skimmer or Jump models. While there are models in 40K (and Epic) that drop bombs I see these vehicles as much more general purpose than their real-world counterparts which tend to be very specialized in what they can do. Though, even in the real world, "bombers" are typically equipped with guns specifically to fend off other aircraft. Thus I see it as reasonable that any Flyer should be able to target any other Flyer. While I personally feel that it should be without the -1, that is of lesser concern to me. Either way, it could use play-testing before a final decision is made. If we wanted to add another level of detail, we could adjust "Interceptor" type Flyers to make them more maneuverable than "Bomber" types, probably by giving certain models the "Agile" ability, and then only the ones with Agile could shoot at other Flyers & Floaters without penalty. Obviously, doing so would have to increase the cost of those models, but it would make them more "realistic". What you said about Floaters is true scream, but only if the rules on page 26 are in play. If only using those on page 24, then even Floaters cannot fire at Flyers & Floaters. |
Author: | primarch [ Tue Feb 10, 2015 10:46 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed rule amendment for Flyer rules |
Hi! Fliers is and continues to be a sore spot in net epic. It was clearly tacked on to the main system with no thought to it and thus the myriad of problems we have seen throughout the years. As it stands, aircraft don't really have a good differentiation based on its role. Bomber types tend to have better saves and more armament, making them superior in the context of shooting than interceptor types. If shooting becomes more "liberal" then bomber types have the definite edge. The only way to "fix" this is along the lines Magnus suggested by defining some sort of ability and what that means. I agree that in aerial combat the CAF stat is meaningless. I like the variant that was thrown around equaling CAF to d6's rolled in aerial combat, each roll of 6 scoring a hit. Having tried it and seeing the pros and cons I came up with a prospective system. CAF value can be renamed to something more suitable like DFV (dogfight value), the name isn't really important than the concept that the current CAF value will now equal the number of d6's the use against an enemy in a dogfight. Orders 1. Charge (dogfight). These are the orders given when engaging into air to air combat. Both sides roll their allotment of d6 equal to their CAF value. When engaging in firing at other aircraft, do not use the weapons listed (these are for direct fire versus land based), instead use the floaters or fliers CAF value as the number of d6 to roll against the target. Each die roll equal to or exceeding the target number inflicts one hit versus the flier. Each hit requires an armor save (no modifiers), target is destroyed on unsuccessful save. Additional hits in the same aerial combat round will decrease the armor save by one (may result in auto destruction if enough hits are scored). Surviving units may act normally afterwards. Advance (strafe) uses direct fire weapon and land targets. First Fire (landing) to land aircraft for the disembarkation of troops. Uses standard CAF rules and can be targeted by aerial direct fire weapons New skill Interceptor: in aerial combat only "6's" score hits. All other types get hit on 5+. Floaters get hit on 4+ With this system the following things may be achieved: 1. Fliers with interceptors are harder to hit, but usually possess lower armor saves and lesser direct fire weapons. They are good in knocking out other fliers, but mediocre at other tasks. 2. Bomber types are poor at repelling interceptors (inflict less hits and get hit more often), but generally have higher saves and are more effective at strafing. 3. Floaters may be very good at defense and attacking land targets but are easily hit by other fliers. Their saves are quite good, but are balanced by the higher proportion of hit. I think this better represents what fliers are trying to do, as well as answering some of the outstanding issues with them. Thoughts? Primarch |
Author: | MagnusIlluminus [ Wed Feb 11, 2015 5:19 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed rule amendment for Flyer rules |
My initial thought on that is that it seems a bit cumbersome, but I cannot explain exactly how. I'll have to ponder that for a while. In reference to scream above asking why would people still take ground based AA instead of just Flyers, well, they probably wouldn't quite as much. Not that there is much of it to take anyway. Still, there should be reason for ground based AA weaponry. Perhaps we could change such weapons away from needing to be activated as such, and instead say that they provide a "Flak Zone" within their Range value that causes that hemispherical area to count as difficult terrain for Flyers and Floaters. At the very least, it would mean that F&F models would move at half-value through the Flak Zone. We could also say that any such model that ends it's move within the Flak Zone automatically takes a hit with the weapon's TSM. For making the Orders of AA models matter, perhaps the Flak Zone covers out to their Range value if on Advance, their Range +25cm if on First Fire, and no Flak Zone when on Charge (or Fall Back) Orders. |
Author: | primarch [ Wed Feb 11, 2015 5:57 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed rule amendment for Flyer rules |
MagnusIlluminus wrote: My initial thought on that is that it seems a bit cumbersome, but I cannot explain exactly how. I'll have to ponder that for a while. In reference to scream above asking why would people still take ground based AA instead of just Flyers, well, they probably wouldn't quite as much. Not that there is much of it to take anyway. Still, there should be reason for ground based AA weaponry. Perhaps we could change such weapons away from needing to be activated as such, and instead say that they provide a "Flak Zone" within their Range value that causes that hemispherical area to count as difficult terrain for Flyers and Floaters. At the very least, it would mean that F&F models would move at half-value through the Flak Zone. We could also say that any such model that ends it's move within the Flak Zone automatically takes a hit with the weapon's TSM. For making the Orders of AA models matter, perhaps the Flak Zone covers out to their Range value if on Advance, their Range +25cm if on First Fire, and no Flak Zone when on Charge (or Fall Back) Orders. Hi! I have used the variant CAF as d6's method and the resolution is pretty quick. No more cumbersome than the standard rules. The system is very "visual" there are no modififiers, since all you do if compare die that score hits. I've tried something close to this and it worked well. Of course further testeing is always a good idea. Granted this may be "too much" of a change for Gold and the proposed amendment with any shortcomings may suffice for gold. But this would be good for Platinum though. Primarch |
Author: | scream [ Thu Feb 12, 2015 10:02 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed rule amendment for Flyer rules |
Hi all, what's Peter proposed is interesting (and not far away from a rule I proposed few years ago ![]() I think it's possible to tweak it a bit: "Charge" order would become "Air Patrol": Flyers with a charge order create a Zone of Control that extends to X*cm around them. Any enemy flyer entering this Zoc are submitted to an aerial attack from Air patrolling units. Resolving the "Air patrol" combat: each flyer has a number of dices equals to its Caf value: ie Thunderbolts fighters with a +4 caf get 4 dices, Marauder Fighter-Bomber with a +2 caf get 2 dices). Both players sums the number of dices and roll the according quantity of dices. Each dice scores on a 6+ at TSM 0. Units with "Air Patrol" order get a +1 to-hit bonus (so no need to add an "Interceptor" ability). Once the number of successful hits is determined, each player roll for armor save (no TSM modifier) and removes as many models as armor roll failed. "Advance" become "Ground attack": as actual advance order. Units with this order can fire at ground units. They can also shot at flyers units with their "Air-to-air" noted weapons if they have some. "First fire" become "Deploy mission": as actual charge order but: A flyer with "Deploy mission" inflicts a -1 to-hit bonus to units in "Air Patrol" trying to hit it. This makes them harder to be hit. Example: Player 1 activates a Thunderbolt Squadron (3 models) with an "Air Patrol" order and resolve the squadron move. Player 2 activates a Bomma squadron (3 models) with a "Ground Mission" order. The squadron enters the Thunderbolt Zone of control, immediatly resolve the "Air Patrol" attack from Thunderbolts. Player 1 with 3 Thunderbolts has 12 attack dices (3 TB with a +4 caf) Player 2 with 3 Bommas has 3 attack dices (3 Bommas with a +1 caf) Both players rolls attack dices: - Player 1 get a +1 to-hit bonus, bringing to-hit value to 5+ and scores 4 hits - Player 2 does not get to-hit any bonus so to-hit value is 6+, as the Bommas are on "Ground attack" order and score 1 hit Both players rolls Armor save: - Player 1 has to roll for 1 4+ armor save (TB has a 4+ armor save) and failed it: he removes 1 model - Player 2 has to roll for 4 2+ armor save (Bomma has a 2+ armore save) and failed 1: he removes 1 model Players 2 can continue the Bommas movement to complete their "Ground attack" order. How to protect from Flyers "Air mission": - pick some ground AA and snap fire at enemy flyers before they take position in the air to prevent your bombers from their mission. - pick some Flyers with high Caf and activate them before your opponent to create your Air Patrol Zone of control X*(size of the Air Patrol Zone of Control): - Proposition 1: fixed value of 15cm radius around - Proposition 2: As flyers have to move at least half of the movement, we could imagine the Zone is computed by dividing by 2 the amount of max move range left. Example: Player 1 with its TB in "Air Patrol" moves them by 50cm. With a max movement of 100cm, there's 50cm left of standard movement. This means that TBs create a Zone of Control of 50cm left / 2 = 25cm radius. A problem with proposition 2: it becomes quite complicated when you have several detachments in Air Patrol that have moved with different ranges. I think this changes in flyers order would not much impact current NetEpic "meta-game". Maybe those flyer rules would become "Advanced flyers rules" or something like that. About Floaters, their case could be easily solved later. Let me know what do you think about it. |
Author: | primarch [ Thu Feb 12, 2015 4:45 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed rule amendment for Flyer rules |
scream wrote: Hi all, what's Peter proposed is interesting (and not far away from a rule I proposed few years ago ![]() I think it's possible to tweak it a bit: "Charge" order would become "Air Patrol": Flyers with a charge order create a Zone of Control that extends to X*cm around them. Any enemy flyer entering this Zoc are submitted to an aerial attack from Air patrolling units. Resolving the "Air patrol" combat: each flyer has a number of dices equals to its Caf value: ie Thunderbolts fighters with a +4 caf get 4 dices, Marauder Fighter-Bomber with a +2 caf get 2 dices). Both players sums the number of dices and roll the according quantity of dices. Each dice scores on a 6+ at TSM 0. Units with "Air Patrol" order get a +1 to-hit bonus (so no need to add an "Interceptor" ability). Once the number of successful hits is determined, each player roll for armor save (no TSM modifier) and removes as many models as armor roll failed. "Advance" become "Ground attack": as actual advance order. Units with this order can fire at ground units. They can also shot at flyers units with their "Air-to-air" noted weapons if they have some. "Charge" become "Deploy mission": as actual charge order but: A flyer with "Deploy mission" inflicts a -1 to-hit bonus to units in "Air Patrol" trying to hit it. This makes them harder to be hit. Example: Player 1 activates a Thunderbolt Squadron (3 models) with an "Air Patrol" order and resolve the squadron move. Player 2 activates a Bomma squadron (3 models) with a "Ground Mission" order. The squadron enters the Thunderbolt Zone of control, immediatly resolve the "Air Patrol" attack from Thunderbolts. Player 1 with 3 Thunderbolts has 12 attack dices (3 TB with a +4 caf) Player 2 with 3 Bommas has 3 attack dices (3 Bommas with a +1 caf) Both players rolls attack dices: - Player 1 get a +1 to-hit bonus, bringing to-hit value to 5+ and scores 4 hits - Player 2 does not get to-hit any bonus so to-hit value is 6+, as the Bommas are on "Ground attack" order and score 1 hit Both players rolls Armor save: - Player 1 has to roll for 1 4+ armor save (TB has a 4+ armor save) and failed it: he removes 1 model - Player 2 has to roll for 4 2+ armor save (Bomma has a 2+ armore save) and failed 1: he removes 1 model Players 2 can continue the Bommas movement to complete their "Ground attack" order. How to protect from Flyers "Air mission": - pick some ground AA and snap fire at enemy flyers before they take position in the air to prevent your bombers from their mission. - pick some Flyers with high Caf and activate them before your opponent to create your Air Patrol Zone of control X*(size of the Air Patrol Zone of Control): - Proposition 1: fixed value of 15cm radius around - Proposition 2: As flyers have to move at least half of the movement, we could imagine the Zone is computed by dividing by 2 the amount of max move range left. Example: Player 1 with its TB in "Air Patrol" moves them by 50cm. With a max movement of 100cm, there's 50cm left of standard movement. This means that TBs create a Zone of Control of 50cm left / 2 = 25cm radius. A problem with proposition 2: it becomes quite complicated when you have several detachments in Air Patrol that have moved with different ranges. I think this changes in flyers order would not much impact current NetEpic "meta-game". Maybe those flyer rules would become "Advanced flyers rules" or something like that. About Floaters, their case could be easily solved later. Let me know what do you think about it. Hi! I would go with somethng like this as well. ![]() Primarch |
Author: | primarch [ Thu Feb 12, 2015 7:19 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed rule amendment for Flyer rules |
Hi! By the way Scream you mention :charge orders" twice. I think you meant "first fre orders" on the first one. Primarch |
Page 1 of 4 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |