Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Broken and Fearless

 Post subject: Broken and Fearless
PostPosted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 10:54 pm 
Swarm Tyrant
Swarm Tyrant
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9348
Location: Singapore
This thread is to discuss the following proposed rule - from Baduin.

The rules for broken formation in EpicA are based on the decision not to rule in which direction broken formation should withdraw, which is difficult (they should move towards their own lines, but away from the enemy, avoid impassable and difficult terrain, etc) but  to introduce instead penalties for broken formation being near enemy. It generally works very well.

It breaks down only with wholly fearless formations, which are free from nearly all such penalties. As has been shown above, they can use withdrawal movements to advance, in the hope of rallying and assaulting enemy,  

I would suggest the following rule, added to the rules for the fearless units:

"Withdrawal usually represents a formation desperately trying to break away from the enemy, and so moving fast (taking two moves) but suffering additional casualties. But a formation composed only of fearless troops keeps cool nerves in the presence of the enemy. Even when broken, they seek cover, defend tenaciously any strong point and only unwillingly retreat. Because of that, they do not suffer additional casualties, but move slower.

Any formation consisting only of Fearless units makes only a single move (instead of two) when withdrawing."

There is also a lesser problem of using fearless formations to move on objective, ignoring zones of control. In regard to that problem I would propose the following rule change:

1.13.3 Withdrawals
....
Withdrawal moves may be made in any direction, but if a
unit ends the second withdrawal move within 15cm of the
enemy, it is destroyed (it is killed while trying to escape!).
Units belonging to formations withdrawing after lost engagement may ignore enemy zones of control while making a withdrawal move but may not move directly over enemy units. This do not applies to formations broken by Blast Markers or withdrawing after failing the rally roll in the end phase.

_________________
https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond.
https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Broken and Fearless
PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 12:10 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
I've stayed opposed to this in all its various forms.
===

Jervis made it clear that the intent of the "ignore ZoC" rule was solely so that formations could escape from a lost assault.  It's broader application is what is causing problems, not the intended effect.

Also, during a lot of playtesting broken Fearless units were still destroyed if they ended a withdrawal within a ZoC, just like a normal unit within 15cm.  I've never figured out why that was dropped.

Reinstituting the Fearless/ZoC rule (which has already been well playtested) and changing the "ignore ZoC" from all withdrawal moves to only assault-loss (basically, move it from 1.13 to 1.12) would accomplish the same intended effects.

_________________
Neal


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Broken and Fearless
PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 12:18 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 5:07 pm
Posts: 1015
Quote (nealhunt @ 02 Nov. 2005 (23:10))
I've stayed opposed to this in all its various forms.
===

Jervis made it clear that the intent of the "ignore ZoC" rule was solely so that formations could escape from a lost assault.  It's broader application is what is causing problems, not the intended effect.

Also, during a lot of playtesting broken Fearless units were still destroyed if they ended a withdrawal within a ZoC, just like a normal unit within 15cm.  I've never figured out why that was dropped.

Reinstituting the Fearless/ZoC rule (which has already been well playtested) and changing the "ignore ZoC" from all withdrawal moves to only assault-loss (basically, move it from 1.13 to 1.12) would accomplish the same intended effects.

How about changing the rule to.

A unit that is broken in combat may ignore the ZOC of formations in the combat or have added supporting fire?

_________________
Image
My Photobucket


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Broken and Fearless
PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 4:32 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Hmm... I'm with NH on this. I'm not sure I understand the reason or need for this.

If we are trying to penalize fearless, why? They are fearless afterwards.

Withdrawal doesn't mean scattering, running around like a chicken with your head cut off... it means tactical withdrawl.

Fearless units are not mindless, they are not necessarily arrogant or stalwart either. They just don't buckle under pressure and forget their battlefield doctrine when the situation gets too hot.

They should still deserve the right to tactically withdraw IMHO.

Hell, not that I want to see it or am proposing it, but a Fearless unit might withdraw _more_ tactically than a unit whim which withdraws and is _not_fearless.

So, I'm with NH as I really don't understand the need for this rule.

I'm a firm believer of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"

Sorry.

_________________
Rob


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Broken and Fearless
PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 7:45 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 5:07 pm
Posts: 1015
Quote (Tactica @ 03 Nov. 2005 (15:32))
I'm a firm believer of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"

Sorry.

You sure it's not broken.... OK. try this one. Warlord Titan, loses a combat, becomes broken... It then moves twice. If it then fails it's rally test it then move twice again.... I've seen the things, hit the blitz objective turn 2. when normally they would be unable to do this easily.

_________________
Image
My Photobucket


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Broken and Fearless
PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 9:13 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Well, two doubles from breaking plus whatever he moved first turn before he broke and got to the blitz objective? Without calculating that math, I trust you - but that seems really far... Regardless though, your point is understood.

I've seen broken formations run all over the place that I think is more tactical or gamey rather than flat out breaking and running. A withdrawal from a non-fearless formation to your lines is only not a problem if you can put further blast markers on him or engage him. If he retreats to the heart of a large wood, becomes invisible due to the city walls and is no longer in LOF - the non fearless unit that just moved into your lines is just as problematic as the fearless one that walked right up to your blitz objective.

At this scale, I consider that less gamy and more tactical. I withdrew to a position on the battlefield that best suited my units survivability - right?

It could also be a measure risk to a fearless unit -

+ + + Digression + + +

"... the decison to barge straight into the enemy's maw was immediate, grave, and without question. Their lines were dumping a withering hail of fire that was knocking our systems down just as quickly as the servitors could get them online. I could feel the damage, metal creaking, critcal damge - my pain. We needed assistance but comms were down. I have orders and the Lord Admiral was clear. I, Agintal Krill, Grand Princeps of Legio Victis, would not faulter on this day. The God-Emporer protects!"

'GODHAMMER' pressed on, seamingly fearless towards the prime objective - "For the Emporer!" blaring out locally audible comm systems. Appearently that's all it was good for at this point...


+ + + End Digression + + +

Question you _seem_ to be asking is whether the withdrawal moves in general are a problem in E:A, right? I'm not convinced its a problem as aforementioned. I'm not sure tactical withdrawal isn't intentional and justifiable at this scale.

Regardless, at this point I'm not convinced that you are siting a 'fearless unit' specific issue though.

In your specific question/example, I would first have to say "Yay, the warlord isn't charging or shooting on turn 2, and I broke it in turn 1!"

I would then wonder why I didn't do anything about this stranded warlord titan on my side of the table. If there's ever a time to "Turn The Apple Cart" its got to be when the opponents 850 monstrousity is on your side off the table all by his lonesome on the beginning of turn 2. (broke in turn 1, withdraw, fails to rally end of turn 1, withdraws to your blitz obj.)

The amount of blast markers alone should put it as a prime combat candidate OR crossfire candidate _if_ there are adequate resources in the area...

... and if there are not adequate resources in the area...

... the next question begs, Why not - its your Blitz objective?

Cheers,





_________________
Rob


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Broken and Fearless
PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 9:24 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 11147
Location: Canton, CT, USA
Again, I'm with NH on this one.

Although I'm not sure quoting GW's literature is the right way to support a game's rule, I do agree with your reasoning, Tactica.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Broken and Fearless
PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 9:25 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Dwarf_S,

I didn't quote that... I just made it up on the fly...  :p

_________________
Rob


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Broken and Fearless
PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 9:39 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 5:07 pm
Posts: 1015
Quote (Tactica @ 03 Nov. 2005 (20:13))
Regardless, at this point I'm not convinced that you are siting a 'fearless unit' specific issue though.

With a non fearless unit they have to bother about being within 15cm at the end of their move... Fearless units can ignore intervening enemy units to a stupid degree, as they run across the table at a stupid rate. ..

_________________
Image
My Photobucket


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Broken and Fearless
PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 9:43 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 11147
Location: Canton, CT, USA
Quote (Tactica @ 03 Nov. 2005 (20:25))
Dwarf_S,

I didn't quote that... I just made it up on the fly... ?:p

Really? I'm impressed. It sounded like one of GW's authors wrote it.  :cool:

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Broken and Fearless
PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:00 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Mageboltrat,

stupid degree, stupid rate...


LOL, well I see. Hmm... hard to argue with that. :8):


Dwarf Supreme,

Well, although unexpect, I'll take that as a compliment. Thank you!

I was just postulating, in character, why a fearless Warlord might do exactly what Mageboltrat was concerned about or in his words, was, err... 'stupid'.




_________________
Rob


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Broken and Fearless
PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 12:12 am 
Swarm Tyrant
Swarm Tyrant
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9348
Location: Singapore
Can someone summarise the feeling on this rule? It seems that the rule as originally proposed is not supported, but that a rewording or variation on the rule could be interesting. Does anyone want to put forward a suggestion?

Thanks.

_________________
https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond.
https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Broken and Fearless
PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 2:06 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
CS,

What's the problem here we are being asked to fix?

Is withdrawing in any direction a problem?

Is there a problem with fearless units not running away from the enemy?

As of yet, I'm not either convinced or clear of the problem's existence so I'm definitely not the one to write a new rule on this topic.

Cheers,

_________________
Rob


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 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:  


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