Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 2 of 4
  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Squats revisited, Stubborn
Erik M
 Post subject: Squats revisited, Stubborn
PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2008 2:01 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 8:41 pm
Posts: 1480
Location: Gothenburg,Sweden
Thanks for the clarification epilgrim.

Ok, something along the lines of Leader and TSKNF then, is it?

_________________
It would be nice to get lightspeed,
so far we can only reach slight speed.- Erik M
092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
nealhunt
 Post subject: Squats revisited, Stubborn
PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2008 3:03 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA

(epilgrim @ May 30 2008,13:49)
QUOTE
Allowing them more leaders just makes them more like Orks but in smaller formations, at that point what makes play Squats differently?

Um... everything else in the list?

  • Vast amounts of ranged firepower
  • Better command and control, allowing them to use ranged fire
  • IG grade artillery as opposed to zero IDF
  • Almost SM grade infantry instead of attrition troops

    That adds up to a big difference.

    I suppose you could take a Guild Bike army that would end up working a lot like a KoS Ork force, but you could also take an arty/infantry combo that would work like a similar IG force, or an all-elite infantry force that would work like "mud marines."

    • _________________
    Neal
    Top
     Profile Send private message  
     
    Erik M
     Post subject: Squats revisited, Stubborn
    PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2008 3:12 pm 
    Brood Brother
    Brood Brother

    Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 8:41 pm
    Posts: 1480
    Location: Gothenburg,Sweden
    You're forgetting one thing...
    • Costing almost twice to IG and Orks.

    _________________
    It would be nice to get lightspeed,
    so far we can only reach slight speed.    - Erik M
    092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641
    Top
     Profile Send private message  
     
    Erik M
     Post subject: Squats revisited, Stubborn
    PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2008 4:32 pm 
    Brood Brother
    Brood Brother

    Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 8:41 pm
    Posts: 1480
    Location: Gothenburg,Sweden
    Now then, one can't look at single aspects and see the whole.
    But we can build up a picture that way never the less.

    We all want the squats to be sort of stubborn, right?
    And this is somehow linked to blast markers, correct?

    The demiurg idea isn't half bad. But is Inspiring the right one?
    My feeling is that Leader is better. Even if it's close to orks. But that doesn't really help us, thinking like that. Just as with space marines any work with blast markers will end up with similiar effects.

    Is there another way to make them "Keep Going Lads!"?

    _________________
    It would be nice to get lightspeed,
    so far we can only reach slight speed.    - Erik M
    092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641
    Top
     Profile Send private message  
     
    zombocom
     Post subject: Squats revisited, Stubborn
    PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2008 4:52 pm 
    Brood Brother
    Brood Brother
    User avatar

    Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
    Posts: 5569
    How about the previously proposed "stubborn" rule?

    The one that allowed armour saves against hackdown hits and crumbling from blastmarkers when broken.

    _________________
    http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
    Epic: Hive Development Thread
    Top
     Profile Send private message  
     
    epilgrim
     Post subject: Squats revisited, Stubborn
    PostPosted: Fri May 30, 2008 10:35 pm 
    Brood Brother
    Brood Brother

    Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 12:28 pm
    Posts: 362
    Keep in mind the previous applications of stubborn:

    Space Marine: the infantry could re-roll any close combat dice with a score of one, against Orcs it was a one or two.

    Epic 40,000: the infantry could be upgraded to Veterans, making them Stubborn which allowed them to re-roll leadership tests.

    In EA currently:

    Thurgrim list: an extra d6 for both assault resolution and rallying, and dropping the lowest result) (edited)  :;): .

    Demiurg: all formations count as Inspiring.

    Add in the discussion of allowing additional Leaders to represent Squat resolve and here is where we are.

    In terms of statistics and probability the re-rolls and extra dice are very powerful advantages, and EA has only made use of these sparingly. In the end I don't think that this is the best mechanic to illustrate stubborn.

    The use of an assault modifier allows them a +1 in assault resolution before considering all other possible modifiers for both sides. In a close die roll it can make all the difference in forcing another round scraping a narrow win or coming up short, and losing In a lopsided die roll it just adds or subtracts one casualty. To me that is stubborn to a certainty.

    Leader is an awesome ability that was a huge subject regarding the eldar spirit stones. With the exception of Orcs Nobz, and to a lesser degree IG Commissars, Leaders are a scarce resource. The potential to remove an extra BM can mean a lot when trying to get a formation to rally or get them in good order. Orcs need them due to formation size and casualtly rates, however in an army with decent armour saves extra Leaders could be a monster advantage. Keep in mind that the smaller the formation size the more powerful and effective Leader becomes with regards to removing BM.

    Having seen what Leader can achieve and having playtested the use of Inspiring as a formation ability, I suggest you give both a try yourselves and see what happens over a few games.

    If you want extra dice or re-rolls, try that too. I would love to see what you come away with as conclusions.




    _________________
    Squat/Demiurg Army Co-Champion (in cahoots with Jaldon)
    Top
     Profile Send private message  
     
    jaldon454
     Post subject: Squats revisited, Stubborn
    PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 3:11 am 
    Brood Brother
    Brood Brother
    User avatar

    Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:38 am
    Posts: 303
    Location: Utah, Texas, or some Pacific Island
    Thurgrim list: an extra d6 for both assault resolution and rallying.


    Just for clarification the players rolled 3D6 taking the highest 2D6 of the three rolled. And then 2D6 taking the highest 1D6 of the two dice rolled.

    The above wasn't our only attempts at trying to reflect Stubborn.

    We did try the Epic-TL re-roll for every "1" scored in an assault, CC only not FF. And for every roll of "1 or 2" against Orks. We discarded it as it didn't really reflect Stubborn troops but it did make the Squats more deadly in CC.

    We tried just adding +1 in the assault roll off for Squats in CC assaults only. While it did reflect Stubborness, once other 'Inspiring' characters were added to the formation, which quickly became a standard tactic, we thought it a bit over the top. The 'fix' could have been eliminating Inspiring from all the Squat characters, but the group didn't want to try that.

    We tried the +1 in assault CC roll off, kept Inspiring characters, and cut down on the Squat CC/FF stats to compensate for the bonus but it made the stunties too weak. The CC/FF losses compared to FF/CC KIAs weren't close to being offset by the bousus in the roll off.

    In the end we came back to the above to reflect Stubborn.

    Who knows maybe there will be some inspiration found in the steps we went through that leads to a better idea.

    Jaldon :p

    _________________
    I know a dead parrot when I see one and I'm looking at one right now.
    Tyranid AC
    Top
     Profile Send private message  
     
    epilgrim
     Post subject: Squats revisited, Stubborn
    PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 8:24 am 
    Brood Brother
    Brood Brother

    Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 12:28 pm
    Posts: 362
    Just for clarification the players rolled 3D6 taking the highest 2D6 of the three rolled. And then 2D6 taking the highest 1D6 of the two dice rolled.


    yeah, what he said  :D  I am still trying to get used to having access to the forum with Crackberry tech, my thumds are robust and my fingers are atrophying as I evolve.  :;):  sometimes you just use shorthand when the full text seems like a lot of work.

    the typos can be annoying and confusing to others though...

    The above wasn't our only attempts at trying to reflect Stubborn.

    I hear that!  :O

    As I noted earlier in the thread I went with Inspiring as a way to represent Stubborn in the Assault Resolution because a single +1 in the mix of all the possilbe modifiers during an assault really only effects a close roll off between both sides. in all the playtests it occassionally provided some drama moments (the good tesnse kind), but by itself it never threw assaults in their favor in an egregious fashion.

    Note that with one exception (the Mechant Prince) there are no units that also have inspiring, so that the ability never stacked in an assault regardless of the number of formations involved.

    In the end we came back to the above to reflect Stubborn.

    Who knows maybe there will be some inspiration found in the steps we went through that leads to a better idea.

    I here that too. I am curious to see how the newcomers who have expressed interest here would apply the Leader ability and what effect it might have...

    _________________
    Squat/Demiurg Army Co-Champion (in cahoots with Jaldon)
    Top
     Profile Send private message  
     
    fredmans
     Post subject: Squats revisited, Stubborn
    PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 10:46 am 
    Brood Brother
    Brood Brother
    User avatar

    Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 3:15 pm
    Posts: 1316
    Location: Stockholm, Sweden
    As I stated in the other thread, would not a Stubborn rule where Squats are less affected by being outnumbered handle it. Then it is a situational +1 (or +2 if ignoring the 2:1 modifier as well) instead of a flat-out +1, which equally applies to situations where no stubborness is evident (for instance berserkers overrunning an artillery battery).

    This would not be a stubborness per se, but instead perhaps a willingness to fight to the last stand against overwhelming enemies.

    A situational +1 also makes it possible to include characters or units with the Inspiring ability. As jaldon pointed out, an all-out +1 in combination with Inspiring is tough to face.

    Anyway, I will try out some of these ideas during the weekend. Off to playtest...

    /Fredmans




    _________________
    Follow my Epic painting projects: Tyranids vs Steel Legion and Inquisition vs Lost and the Damned @
    http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=14636
    Top
     Profile Send private message  
     
    fredmans
     Post subject: Squats revisited, Stubborn
    PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 11:00 am 
    Brood Brother
    Brood Brother
    User avatar

    Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 3:15 pm
    Posts: 1316
    Location: Stockholm, Sweden

    (jaldon454 @ May 31 2008,03:11)
    QUOTE
    Just for clarification the players rolled 3D6 taking the highest 2D6 of the three rolled. And then 2D6 taking the highest 1D6 of the two dice rolled.

    I still feel that this really offsets the intended possibility of losing an assault despite inflicting more casualties. 3D6 yields a much higher probability of scoring high on one of the dice, which really is what you need to do. Sure, things can still go wrong when dice are involved, but the odds are constantly in favour of the squats (again, think RISK).

    In my playtesting (against Tyranid, Guards and Orks), everything that did not have Reinforced armour or Macro-weapons were very likely to bounce against Squats in an assault. Especially if you rolled low.

    With 2D6 there is a 1/9 probability of not rolling higher than a 2.
    With 3D6 that probability is reduced to 1/27

    I hope my numbers are more correct this time  :D

    /Fredmans




    _________________
    Follow my Epic painting projects: Tyranids vs Steel Legion and Inquisition vs Lost and the Damned @
    http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=14636
    Top
     Profile Send private message  
     
    jaldon454
     Post subject: Squats revisited, Stubborn
    PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 3:01 pm 
    Brood Brother
    Brood Brother
    User avatar

    Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:38 am
    Posts: 303
    Location: Utah, Texas, or some Pacific Island
    There are two things I have learned in the years working on the Epic-A project, they are....................

    (1) When you shove an idea into the one end of an army list it very rarely comes out the other end of the pipe the way you intended it. Basically what you see on paper, which is what effect you think the idea will have, and what really ends up occurring are almost never one and the same :O

    While using averages of what a dice face, or faces, will return to determine what effect they will have on the army list as a whole is helpful, but they are hardly definitive. There are just too many other variables involved, like the other armies special rules, organization, weapons layouts, etc.............

    It is better to look at these like a road sign that is close to your destination, so you know you are getting nearer, but is also telling you your not there yet.

    Most often we will take an idea and play a few Epic-A in a Flash games to road test the results. This is also not a definitive test, but does get one closer to knowing if it is headed in the right direction.

    [I]Epic-A in a Flash is an old idea from way back when, basically it is played on a smaller table, 4' x 4', restricts unit types allowed, and is only around 1,000 points of troops. The advantage here is that a game can be played in under an hour[I]

    (2) My computer doesn't put up what I type as fast as I can type  :angry:

    In my playtesting (against Tyranid, Guards and Orks), everything that did not have Reinforced armour or Macro-weapons were very likely to bounce against Squats in an assault. Especially if you rolled low.


    Obviously you have never seen my buddy Phil roll dice, you could give him 5D6 to roll for Stubborn and he would still probably lose the roll off  :confuse:

    One idea we tossed about but never really tried was to roll a total 3D3 and use the total of two of the three dice. It gives the Squats a better average result, and they never end up rolling a "1"

    Jaldon :p

    _________________
    I know a dead parrot when I see one and I'm looking at one right now.
    Tyranid AC
    Top
     Profile Send private message  
     
    fredmans
     Post subject: Squats revisited, Stubborn
    PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 10:35 pm 
    Brood Brother
    Brood Brother
    User avatar

    Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 3:15 pm
    Posts: 1316
    Location: Stockholm, Sweden

    (jaldon454 @ May 31 2008,15:01)
    QUOTE
    [I]Epic-A in a Flash is an old idea from way back when, basically it is played on a smaller table, 4' x 4', restricts unit types allowed, and is only around 1,000 points of troops. The advantage here is that a game can be played in under an hour[I]

    I totally agree. Epic-in-a-flash is exactly what we're using. 4 x 4", 1000 pts, as many games as possible.

    /Fredmans

    _________________
    Follow my Epic painting projects: Tyranids vs Steel Legion and Inquisition vs Lost and the Damned @
    http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=14636
    Top
     Profile Send private message  
     
    The_Real_Chris
     Post subject: Squats revisited, Stubborn
    PostPosted: Sat May 31, 2008 11:00 pm 
    Brood Brother
    Brood Brother

    Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
    Posts: 8139
    Location: London
    Well, after all the debate I'm with either a) Leader on Heathguard (and more than one to each brotherhood) or b) A rule that allows the squats to choose to fight another round of combat instead of rolling for resolution (thats stubborn :) ). Could make it if any units remain in base to base or similar.

    _________________
    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
    Top
     Profile Send private message  
     
    epilgrim
     Post subject: Squats revisited, Stubborn
    PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 12:05 am 
    Brood Brother
    Brood Brother

    Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 12:28 pm
    Posts: 362
    Between the options TRC suggested I like B.

    My experiences in EA show that multiple Leaders in smaller formations is too effective.

    The use of inspiring as a formation ability to represent Stubborn is not overpowered, but as noted by some that it tinkers with an existing rule.

    Allowing the Squats the ability to force another round is indeed Stubborn!

    I will run a set of playtest games with this in place and see what turns up. My initial guess is the outcomes will depend largely on the relative strength of each side.

    The biggest concern with this idea would be long, grinding assaults. Perhaps I am repeating TRC's intent, but I would suggest that this ability is limited to one use per assault.

    Regardless, I am interested to see how it would work. I will post my results as soon as I can run a few games.

    Neat idea TRC!

    _________________
    Squat/Demiurg Army Co-Champion (in cahoots with Jaldon)
    Top
     Profile Send private message  
     
    Onyx
     Post subject: Squats revisited, Stubborn
    PostPosted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:51 am 
    Purestrain
    Purestrain
    User avatar

    Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:14 am
    Posts: 3416
    Location: Western Australia
    Well, after all the bebate I'm in favour of epilgrim's modification of Inspiring.
    The Squats (excluding the robots) simply start each assault at +1 for assault resolution.

    Simple enough and effective at displaying stubborness.

    _________________
    Just call me Steve.

    NetEA Rules Chair
    NetEA FAQ

    Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
    Some of my Armies.
    My Hobby site.
    Top
     Profile Send private message  
     
    Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
      Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
    Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 2 of 4
    		  [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next


    Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 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