Radical re-think on Jetpacks |
|
nealhunt
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks  Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 4:01 pm |
|
| Purestrain |
 |
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
I'm writing this because I think the jetpack rules don't work well. They seem straightforward, but the interactions they cause with intermingling, entering ZoC, and so on get incredibly byzantine when they have to interact with other formations. By most accounts, jetpacks are also not very effective, certainly not against air assaults. I think the recent threads both here and on the SG boards are ample displays of both points.
I say scrap the special rule altogether. I don't think it can be fixed by being tweaked.
Obviously, we would then need to find a different way to represent it - either a better version of a special rule or a way that does not use a special rule.
I know you are waiting with baited breath for my proposal  , so here it is:
Give jetpack troops jump packs instead and bump their assault values. Put it in the design notes regarding Tau assault values that Jetpack-equipped troops are much better at falling back and utilizing cover during assaults. This would give them more chances to pick apart CC opponents before they get to HTH combat and would also give them advantages in FF, justifying their higher values.
While not as flavorful as the fallback rule, it obviously avoids special rules. The Jetpack troops will have better assault ability, but in most cases their ranged fire will still be better than their FF value. Their FF value will, obviously, still be much better than their CC. That means that the extra assault ability will still be primarily defensive. After all, it's not as if other Tau formations will be able to support an offensive assault in the manner of other armies and there would still be no combined assaults.
Also, since special rules are supposed to be kept to a minimum, this would free up some "special rule capacity" to be used for something else like, say, a "bonding" rule.
===
I think the primary arguments against this idea will be flavor reasons. I'd especially like to hear comments on that as well as any defenses of the current jetpack rule.
_________________
Neal
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
CyberShadow
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 4:23 pm |
|
| Swarm Tyrant |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9349
Location: Singapore
|
|
I agree that the current Jet Pack rules are raising a few questions, but it seems that raising the cc values goes against what the rule was initially trying to represent.
I have alternatively thought about something along the lines of a Jump Pack rule where the cc value is raised, but that enemy units are not actually killed or removed by Tau cc victories. Blast markers would still be placed as usual, and cc resolution would be calculated as if the enemy units had been killed, but they are simply not removed. This would give the Tau player the chance to disrupt enemy formations using cc but not actually destroy anything. However, taking away any ability to win an assault and cause casualties is something that would probably disadvantage the Tau too much.
I am open to suggestions on this. I do feel that the current Jet Pack rule could do with at least some clarification of simplification. I am not sure that a radical change is totally required, but I am open to ideas.
_________________ 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 |
|
|
|
clausewitz
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 5:36 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
|
|
CyberShadow, I think that the "not killing in CC" idea would replace one set of "Byzantine" rules interpretations with an equally Byzantine set of rules.
NealHunt, I think it is important to remember that probably the most important aspect of the "Jet Pack" ability is not for the Tau units to get their FF values by avoiding HtH, but in denying the enemy their CC attacks (like demons, SM assault/terminator, Stricking Scorpion Aspects, Orks and 'Nids). Tau FF is slightly better than CC but only by the odd hit or two. But the CC ability of many formations is many times more powerful than their FF ability.
Therefore, I would suggest either: we address the complexities of the Jet Pack rule with a clear FAQ entry (with examples of the trickier aspects), OR, make the "Jet Pack" rule mirror what the Skimmer rule does in CC (i.e. to force FF). Since that option is slightly less powerful than the current rule it could be balanced with a small boost to the FF value of the relevent units if deemed appropriate.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tiny-Tim
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 5:49 pm |
|
| Hybrid |
 |
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:32 pm
Posts: 4893
Location: North Yorkshire
|
| Quote (clausewitz @ 19 Dec. 2005 (16:36)) | | make the "Jet Pack" rule mirror what the Skimmer rule does in CC (i.e. to force FF). |
I would have to say that I agree with this.
Can we not make it so that if a Tau formation is engaged then Jetpacks can count as skimmers, but if the Tau engage then they don't.
Tiny
_________________
_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk - home of the UK Epic tournament scene
NetEA NetERC Xenos Lists Chair
NetEA Ork + Feral Ork + Speed Freak Champion
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
nealhunt
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 6:01 pm |
|
| Purestrain |
|
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
|
CW: I don't think that it's possible to address all the issues in a comprehensive but still reasonable manner.
OTOH, the "skimmer effect" idea is definitely a good idea. I would only worry that it is too powerful.
_________________
Neal
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 7:39 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
|
I agree that the current jet pack rules are not working.
I do not agree in giving the Tau a CC stat bump here. I don't think its something we want to encourage in CC.
I do not like the idea of no kills in close combat - same reasons as CW.
I do think CW's suggestion of making units with jet packs count as skimmers in assault works the cleanest. I'll have to think about it more, but this makes the most sense and is representative of them jumping into cover to avoid being shot at. At face value, I like this for the fluff value quite a bit actually!
Cheers for the suggestion.
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
CyberShadow
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 8:01 pm |
|
| Swarm Tyrant |
|
|
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9349
Location: Singapore
|
|
The 'skimmer mimic' idea certainly has value, and seems intuitive and to have the right kind of effects. We would need to be careful that we did not then boost the FF values and by consequence make short range assaults more of an attractive option for the Tau... but I like the idea.
_________________ 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 |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 8:17 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
CS, totally agree. FF should not be boosted. Much playtest would be needed to see how this faired against cc oriented lists mainly. Against other highly shooty lists, its not going to make a hill of beans difference of course. 
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
asaura
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:28 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 11:34 am
Posts: 481
|
I have to say I keep getting surprised with the problems people seem to be having with the current rules. I think they are just fine, and that the "byzantine thing" may be just sour grapes from people whose assaults have been foiled. That said, I acknowledge that the current rules do seem to cause many problems, it's just that other people seem to have the problems...
One idea for brainstorming is to use Jump Packs + First Strike as an abstraction of jet pack tactics. Yet another idea is to use the Eldar Hit-and-Run.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
RedDevil
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:57 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 9:58 pm
Posts: 112
|
|
Just to clarify, I think that the "Act as skimmer" rule was only supposed to work when the Tau were on the receiveing end of an assault, not when they initiated it. This is how I read it, and I would only support it if this were the case.
Was this correct?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2005 11:42 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
|
RedDevil,
That was my understanding as well... as I don't want to encourage charges, I'm right there with you.
That's the only way I'd support it without playtesting.
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Steele
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 10:32 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am
Posts: 423
Location: Duisburg , Germany
|
| Quote (asaura @ 19 Dec. 2005 (21:28)) | I have to say I keep getting surprised with the problems people seem to be having with the current rules. I think they are just fine, and that the "byzantine thing" may be just sour grapes from people whose assaults have been foiled. That said, I acknowledge that the current rules do seem to cause many problems, it's just that other people seem to have the problems... ?
One idea for brainstorming is to use Jump Packs + First Strike as an abstraction of jet pack tactics. Yet another idea is to use the Eldar Hit-and-Run. |
I wouldn?t say that they are having the problems constantly. But certain situations arise only from time to time , and this rare troubles deserve to be heard as well. And before someone yells that there are too many "broken" Rules with the Tau, we should adress them.
Cheers!
Steele
_________________
Quid pro Quo
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
xerxes
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:12 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 3:31 pm
Posts: 13
|
| Quote (RedDevil @ 19 Dec. 2005 (20:57)) | Just to clarify, I think that the "Act as skimmer" rule was only supposed to work when the Tau were on the receiveing end of an assault, not when they initiated it. ?This is how I read it, and I would only support it if this were the case.
Was this correct? |
Surely this is irrelevant? If you?re doing the assaulting you simply don?t move them into base contact? Same effect, or have I missed some subtle wording somewhere?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
clausewitz
|
Post subject: Radical re-think on Jetpacks Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:44 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
|
|
Xerxes, depends slightly on circumstances, there is the counter-charge and possiblity of further rounds of combat etc. But usually yes the same effect.
Just to clarify, I think that the "Act as skimmer" rule was only supposed to work when the Tau were on the receiveing end of an assault, not when they initiated it. This is how I read it, and I would only support it if this were the case. |
To clarify the "skimmer-like" effect was intended to be when assaulted by the enemy, not when the Jet Pack units are doing the assaulting.
CW: I don't think that it's possible to address all the issues in a comprehensive but still reasonable manner. |
Neal, you might be right, but I thought I should mention that option as that is how these kind of rulings are usually dealt with.
I do think CW's suggestion of making units with jet packs count as skimmers in assault works the cleanest. I'll have to think about it more, but this makes the most sense and is representative of them jumping into cover to avoid being shot at. At face value, I like this for the fluff value quite a bit actually!
Cheers for the suggestion.
Tactica, that's what we are all here for
I've always thought that the main effect of the Tau Jet Packs was similar to the skimmer no-CC rule, so this seemed a logical suggestion. My only concern is that its sometimes not quite as good (i.e. when that 10cm withdrawal actually puts you out of engage range completely), which is why I though
perhaps some other bonus (e.g. FF boost, or First Strike?) might be needed. Obviously we have to be really careful with that as we don't want to encourge the Tau charge, but on crisis (which have 3 shots when shooting, but just one in FF) it would seem to be safe to assume that FF would very rarely be better than shooting at 15cm range.
