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

GT objective system
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=11548		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  rpr [ Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:40 pm ]
Post subject:  GT objective system
While I have been playing GT scenarios of E:A, in almost all games the objectives have been captured or snatched away (contested) by lone surviving fast units, and advance of units to objectives blocked by routed formations.

Of the latter:
While the rules have nice system of punishing careless placement of routed units via blast marker extra kills and minuses to rally tests, on GT scenarios the time scale (3-4 turns) is so short that this extra vulnerability of an routed unit is far outweighted the possibility to block enemy advance.

Of the first:
As any objective can be captured by a single unit, or a single unit can take the objective away, this leads to following things:
- objectives need to be protected by huge hordes and careful placing that there is absolutely no location where enemy can march to be within 15cm of the objective. Most of us have noted that this is sometimes very hard to do.
- any methods to put blast marker to arbitrary places is far better than it might sound, as this is the best countermeasure against these lone objective snatchers. This makes flyers etc. far better than they sometimes should be..

These things are the ones who bother me perhaps the most in E:A GT (which is basically always used when you play with somebody new).  Naturally YMMV, but I try to find a ways to make games a bit more interesting without making them more complex or changing the balance issues.

Of the 'routed move' things, there could be a rule to prevent routing enemy to move closer to enemy formation than it started (to maximum range of 30cm). Thus, if a routed bike unit starts from the other side of the board, it cannot move within 30cm of an enemy unit on the other side of board. If it started within 20cm of some enemy unit, it can keep on that distance but cannot come closer. And so on.
Fearless units is a bit different issue here (but I still propose that if they move, they should obey the same rules as other units)

The objective system is another. What if the objective can only be contested by a force which is at least half the strength of an enemy there? (maybe limit it so that 4 is always enough to contest. As always, War Engines have "strength" equal to starting DC).
Thus, if there is 5 space marine units within 15cm of an objective, Orks would need at least 3 stands within 15cm of it to contest it. Otherwise it belongs to space marines.

Comments? The latter one would not be that big change - you could still use single units to claim free objetives, but at least they could not mess with objectives patrolled by a 6 unit formation.
Author:  nealhunt [ Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:20 pm ]
Post subject:  GT objective system
I don't agree with some of your assertions, rpr.

The ability to place BMs all over the board is intended to be quite powerful.  In other words, it's a feature, not a bug.

It doesn't require huge hordes of units to protect an objective.  A fairly small formation can cause very large detours, especially for non-skimmer vehicles.  If that weren't true, then your complaint about broken formations being able to impede the enemy to a large extent wouldn't be true.

What you actually need is one large formation (to both capture and block) or 2 small formations (1 to capture and the other to block).  With good objective placement, you can often grab 2-3 objectives with just 2-3 formations as a single formation can block or capture multiple objectives.

There is a solid counter for someone who uses lots of broken formations to block objectives - make sure from the beginning of the game that you are prepared for a tie-breaker.  Plan to take only enough objectives to stop a win and crush the broken formations that are in harm's way to build points.
Author:  rpr [ Mon Feb 18, 2008 2:37 pm ]
Post subject:  GT objective system
What a pain GT object/retreat system turned out to be once again in the last tournament.
(This, of course, is enforced by the fact that 'victory by points' is far inferior to 'victory by goals'
on our tournament level - i.e. you try to avoid the "draw in goals" and try to win by goals to the last minute...)

Anyway, as I seem to be quite alone with my problem with GT objectives, I will most probably create alternative "Tournament Match" rules that can be used instead of GT - much easier than banging my head to wall. It will be quite close to GT, but fixing those things I and my opponents have had issues with. Will get back to that later, have to make some drafts...
Author:  Wisp [ Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:09 pm ]
Post subject:  GT objective system
Not totally alone, I agree on the contesting part. I don't think aircraft or blocking movement is such a problem, but some lone hero marching in the last turn (especially skimmers and jump infantry) and contesting an objective a warlord titan is sitting on just seems wrong.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:15 pm ]
Post subject:  GT objective system

(Wisp @ Feb. 19 2008,12:09)
QUOTE
Not totally alone, I agree on the contesting part. I don't think aircraft or blocking movement is such a problem, but some lone hero marching in the last turn (especially skimmers and jump infantry) and contesting an objective a warlord titan is sitting on just seems wrong.

The point about the objectives in Epic is that they're meant to be hard to achieve.

Even the smallest enemy formation can stymie your ambitions.
Author:  Moscovian [ Tue Feb 19, 2008 1:52 pm ]
Post subject:  GT objective system
...And there is nothing to prevent you from performing the same actions that your opponent is 'pulling' on you.  If he is holding objectives with small formations you should contest them with small formations (or vice versa).
Author:  rpr [ Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:49 pm ]
Post subject:  GT objective system
I'm thinking of systems like 'you have to have presence to objective for one full turn to claim it'...
i.e. at the end of the turn see who could control the objective, providing there is no enemy. If an army controls an objective, uncontested, and could control it last turn (contested or not), it can now claim it  (control/contest as earlier, so one single marching bike unit is ok. And it would be ok to switch the controlling formation, i.e. on turn 2 march with single bike to blitz, then get wiped, and then march with another bike to blitz on turn 3, now claiming it).

This however might make games longer as it would be harder to claim objectives. But that would encourage operations around the objectives well in advance and make more strategical game than tactical.
Author:  Markconz [ Wed Feb 20, 2008 4:59 am ]
Post subject:  GT objective system
I have a feeling that EA might even be too focused on the objectives, and not enough about destroying the opposing army... especially at low points levels :)
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/