Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 71 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

If you could change the rules...

 Post subject: Re: If you could change the rules...
PostPosted: Fri Aug 14, 2020 10:42 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2020 7:18 pm
Posts: 10
tc63 wrote:
A fairly simple, small change that I would like to see would be to have activation rolls have a cumulative -1 for retaining.
“But wait, when would that ever come into play?”
Ah, just at the end stages of a turn, if one player is significantly lower on activations than the other. I would like to class these end-stage activations as a form of retain, with cumulative -1s to activate. This would represent a more tightly organised force being easier to command against a larger, more spread out foe.
But in gameplay terms, it would mean that more upgrades may be taken by formations in tournament games,so half the battle isn’t just about baking as many activations as possible into your list.
May make for some more varied list building?



I can see where you're coming from, but this would make lists with good CiC but small activation counts, like AMTL and SM even more powerful. Card based activation or Battletech's alternating turns might be a decent solution.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: If you could change the rules...
PostPosted: Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:56 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 10:56 am
Posts: 27
My biggest pet peeve with rules is the individual unit formations (esp with fearless), such as commissars in IG. I would make a minimum % of formation to need to be alive to be around.

Amusingly I did go further and wrote up a new ruleset because I felt like trying how hard it would be. Of course I ended up doing a lot of things differently as well to separate it out as well and try out new and interesting things. Such as "moving deployment". I guess the post for it vanished but I can re-upload it if someone wants to check it out.

Edit: I was going to upload the ruleset, but it seems that it's 3.2MB in size and there is file limit of 3MB. Hmm ....


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: If you could change the rules...
PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2020 12:19 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 9182
Location: Manalapan, FL
You just post a link to it on a file storage cloud service like OneDrive or Google docs or DropBox instead.

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: If you could change the rules...
PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2020 12:50 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 4:24 pm
Posts: 309
Location: Galicia
Or use another format: If it weights 3,2 Mbytes it has lots of images or the format itself of the file is eating a lot of bytes already. Other times saving it in the same format with another program changes the file size a lot, as i have seen on .docx and .pdf, mainly due to having more options on that same format when saving.

Back on topic, my main gripe with the rules is the radical nature of the ground AA of having it or nor being able to do a thing without a middle point. Maybe giving every AT weapon of at least 30cm range the opportunity to put a BM for under fire at half the range could help, with re-balancing of the points on the flyers and shorter ranged AA. It would be to help with the back and forth of air power with ground AA and having to adapt all the time to changes in the amount of air power.

_________________
Sculpting Orks thread
Statistics of games for OGBM list


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: If you could change the rules...
PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2020 2:16 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2020 7:18 pm
Posts: 10
Hena2 wrote:
My biggest pet peeve with rules is the individual unit formations (esp with fearless), such as commissars in IG. I would make a minimum % of formation to need to be alive to be around.

What's wrong with commissars?

Also when's your next video :P


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: If you could change the rules...
PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2020 4:09 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 10:56 am
Posts: 27
Drang wrote:
Hena2 wrote:
My biggest pet peeve with rules is the individual unit formations (esp with fearless), such as commissars in IG. I would make a minimum % of formation to need to be alive to be around.

What's wrong with commissars?

I dislike that a singe stand is allowed to exists in the scale of epic (ie. platoon level game). IMO a formation that has been shot too much should just disperse as they stop being relevant at the tactical level of the play. Of course in game you then need to hunt them down and if they are fearless then breaking and shooting is not sufficient, but you have to actually kill that stand.

Quote:
Also when's your next video :P

My games got a bit slowed down due to silly little virus, but I'll try to schedule some games again soonish :).


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: If you could change the rules...
PostPosted: Mon Aug 24, 2020 11:57 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2020 7:18 pm
Posts: 10
Hena2 wrote:
Drang wrote:
Hena2 wrote:
My biggest pet peeve with rules is the individual unit formations (esp with fearless), such as commissars in IG. I would make a minimum % of formation to need to be alive to be around.

What's wrong with commissars?

I dislike that a singe stand is allowed to exists in the scale of epic (ie. platoon level game). IMO a formation that has been shot too much should just disperse as they stop being relevant at the tactical level of the play. Of course in game you then need to hunt them down and if they are fearless then breaking and shooting is not sufficient, but you have to actually kill that stand.


I think it's quite thematic. A fanatical political officer, keeping a few men together by fear and sheer force of will, forcing the enemy to either bypass or destroy them.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: If you could change the rules...
PostPosted: Tue Aug 25, 2020 6:01 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 10:56 am
Posts: 27
Drang wrote:
Hena2 wrote:
Drang wrote:
Hena2 wrote:
My biggest pet peeve with rules is the individual unit formations (esp with fearless), such as commissars in IG. I would make a minimum % of formation to need to be alive to be around.

What's wrong with commissars?

I dislike that a singe stand is allowed to exists in the scale of epic (ie. platoon level game). IMO a formation that has been shot too much should just disperse as they stop being relevant at the tactical level of the play. Of course in game you then need to hunt them down and if they are fearless then breaking and shooting is not sufficient, but you have to actually kill that stand.


I think it's quite thematic. A fanatical political officer, keeping a few men together by fear and sheer force of will, forcing the enemy to either bypass or destroy them.

In a game which models individuals, yes. In a game which is not about individuals but companies, a single stand shouldn't matter.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: If you could change the rules...
PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2020 11:37 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 11:10 pm
Posts: 1145
Location: Verona. Italy
In our play group we updated some marginal rules, playing sometimes very big scearios, battles of 6 or more turns and campaign. Buy in play we changed two Golden rules, and i assure you we playtested for years with success.

GOLDEN 1
Activation limit 1st action during a turn
The players, as the first action of the turn , can not keep the initiative. From the second activation is possible to keep it
as normal. That is, 1 per faction’ action as the first turn’s action, in order to decrease the initiative roll impact. In fact,
this rule limits the impact of the initiative on the turn, giving more depth to the global tactics.

GOLDEN 2
Support fire in engagements limit
Each formation can give its support fire only once per turn.
In case of a tie of the engagement’s result , the “second round” of the engagement will be done only by the involved
formations. Who gave support in this engage will not give a second during the same turn. Mark this aspect for each
formations. This rule represent that formation can only help another formation during the turn, limiting and giving a
realistic aspect at the support fire. A detachment can use his F/F only once, when activated, and support infinite engage?
We see this unrealistic.

There are more House rules about stronghold, siege scenarios, AA limit, destroying buildings, heavy space ships in Battle, etc...
Here the full House rules compendium
http://www.caputofrancesco.com/eatotalwar/EATOTALWAR_compendium_v1.0.pdf

_________________
It Could Be Worse... http://goo.gl/mxJVK
EATOTALWAR: http://goo.gl/xLNrvL
Painting and modelling: http://goo.gl/fB4fV
Orkonia: http://goo.gl/j6Q3v
Hive Cassius: http://goo.gl/vJSxA


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: If you could change the rules...
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 4:58 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 8:14 pm
Posts: 523
Location: Galicia, Spain
caregadras wrote:

GOLDEN 1
Activation limit 1st action during a turn
The players, as the first action of the turn , can not keep the initiative. From the second activation is possible to keep it
as normal. That is, 1 per faction’ action as the first turn’s action, in order to decrease the initiative roll impact. In fact,
this rule limits the impact of the initiative on the turn, giving more depth to the global tactics.

GOLDEN 2
Support fire in engagements limit
Each formation can give its support fire only once per turn.
In case of a tie of the engagement’s result , the “second round” of the engagement will be done only by the involved
formations. Who gave support in this engage will not give a second during the same turn. Mark this aspect for each
formations. This rule represent that formation can only help another formation during the turn, limiting and giving a
realistic aspect at the support fire. A detachment can use his F/F only once, when activated, and support infinite engage?
We see this unrealistic.


I really like those two, in a similar way AA can shoot at a given fm just once.

_________________
Epic Armageddon in Spanish (from Spain): http://www.box.net/shared/3u5vr8a370

Konig Armoured Regiment FanList: https://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd ... 41#p581941


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: If you could change the rules...
PostPosted: Fri Sep 11, 2020 3:00 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 11:10 pm
Posts: 1145
Location: Verona. Italy
lord-bruno wrote:

I really like those two, in a similar way AA can shoot at a given fm just once.


Yes, for the AA we have set if I remember well that AA can shoot at 2 maximum formations per turn.

_________________
It Could Be Worse... http://goo.gl/mxJVK
EATOTALWAR: http://goo.gl/xLNrvL
Painting and modelling: http://goo.gl/fB4fV
Orkonia: http://goo.gl/j6Q3v
Hive Cassius: http://goo.gl/vJSxA


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 71 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

cron

Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net