The Squat Batrep is up in the battle reports sections, please post comments here on that battle report

Jaldon

_________________
I know a dead parrot when I see one and I'm looking at one right now.
Tyranid AC

We felt that this battle showed well that the Stubborn rules work as we had intended them to. The intention was to make the Squats a bit tougher in assaults without giving them direct combat advantages through direct CC/FF numbers. Basically forcing opponents to better prepare attacks against Squats to overcome the slight advantage they get for rolling 3D6 in resolution created this effect while at the same time not making them ‘better‘ in direct combat action. Go against the Squats in assaults (FF or CC) were you only have a slight advantage, like fewer BMs, or just plain outnumbering, and the odds are the Squats will come out on top without inflicting a large number of losses, as direct combat value increases would. To us this seems to be what stubborn is, IE troops that are harder to move off a position, but that aren’t necessarily ‘better’ in direct combat then the troops they are facing.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Jaldon,

Thanks for posting the details of the battle! I have no specific comments about Stubborn as the dice rolls and assault resolution did not have a significant effect in this game, in as far as giving the Squats a unbeatable advantage.

In my experiences with the list, it may just be my own dice rolling that makes the 3d6 and 2d6 seem so effective...regardless, my games over the last two weeks proved one thing, my own take on Stubborn (+1 in assault resolution) yields very little as it only created one tie where I went on to be wiped out (by 'nids). As more games unfold I am seeing the value in switching to a rally modifier of some sort as being more useful and representative.

In many situations it seems to come down to the oppenent's dice rolling in creating the sense of a balanced list, and the decisive nature of the assualt resolution can really magnify the perception of overpowered-ness (especially if your opponent continually loses the assaults).

My two games in Baltimore were so lopsided that the Thrugrimm's Stubborn might have caused some outcry, minimizing the fact that their rolling was so subpar.

I did have one question...Why did the cyclops not fire on the Stompa Mob? It would appear that it should have been able to draw a LOS with plenty of range...a minor question to be sure, but I am curious.

ep

_________________
Squat/Demiurg Army Co-Champion (in cahoots with Jaldon)

Something of a quibble and nothing to do with game balance or anything. How is stubborn related to winning fights in this way? At least in  a literary sense a stubborn fighter always takes more damage but sometimes pulls through by out lasting the opponent. An assault boost just seems to be being better at fighting, so quicker or better co-ordination, more firepower etc. Also your language tends to be around people fighting the squats - being attacked, defending a position etc. If you had a Squat assault army attacking a more static opponent is this also stubborn?

_________________
I know a dead parrot when I see one and I'm looking at one right now.
Tyranid AC

Twas just a bit of wondering if it would not be better called something else as the word stubborn doesn't suggest the effect.

As to language tis partly batrep partly reflections afterword. The language is that the rule is intended as some sort of reactive or defensive measure. I was wondering if you had an attacking army would you still call it stubborn. Or say if a space marine army had it. What would you call it if Dark Angels say got to roll 3d6 after an air assault?

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Jaldon,

thanks for the reply on the Cyclops, it's a shame it never got to shoot at the target with the greatest potential for a satisfying kill...enough on that.  

Regarding your comments on dice, tactics and experience: I agree with everything you point out; that no one factor can determine the overall playablility of a game or in this case an army list (thirty years of wargaming has taught me that much).

Much like yourself I rely on tactics and strategy to carry my chances of victory, hence why I tend to play IG and Stunties as I view these armies as more responsive (and forgiving) to a committed plan. Other lists such as SM and Eldar, from my experience, shine when you work up trick combinations or min/max for a very narrow strategy. The tricks work once, maybe twice, and then become stale.

Thanks once more for the detailed bat-rep, and the input from your player group.

ep

_________________
Squat/Demiurg Army Co-Champion (in cahoots with Jaldon)