Steve54 wrote:
In your scenarios that disadvantage for the player with more flyers is only for that turn, he should then be able to intercept the CAPing formation post CAP and then have a free rein. IMO all that cap-a-cap does is result in more and more aircraft being taken and increase the power of air assault (particularly elder) neither of which are good things.
no it doesnt
Turn 2, player with his lightnings and two bombers has exactly the same situation as described in the part of the example where i explain that if he doesnt have his lightnings on CAP, all he can do is throw a unit of bombers out there, hope that the opponent doesnt kill them all with his CAP, and then use intercept to kill them.
what if he only had one formation of bombers? he sacrifices essentially all his air power to neutralise his opponents air power. again, disadvantage goes to the player with more aircraft and/or bombers.
imagine, for instance, that you could only shoot at formations that are on overwatch if they had first shot at you. that is essentially what the current CAP rules are. once a formation is on CAP, it is assured of being able to complete its interception run unmolested by aircraft flak (but again, not ground flak, futher diminishing the reason to include aircraft at all)
there is already a natural cap (excuse the pun) on the amount of aircraft that can be taken, in every list except marines. Marines, as always, get to do whatever the **** they want, but I do not believe that the CAP-a-CAP rule would in any way result in massed aircraft reliance. Ground flak is still in most cases, better. it's usually harder to kill, it can function against any target it wants, and can shoot at multiple aircraft formations in a turn. it usually has longer range, it can shoot at disengaging aircraft, it can contest and claim objectives. and it' almost always cheaper too.
it would reduce the effectiveness of the forces that take a bunch of ground flak and one formation of aircraft vs the effectiveness of those who take more intercepting formations, but only in relation to that. (in much the same way as taking a lot of shadowswords currently favours the player when fighting titans, but doesnt favour them much when playing against an ork swam army.) but it seems to me that the aircraft rules should favour the person with the most planes, not the other way around.
at the moment, there is a lot of ground flak, and very little use of aircrafts, except for air assault, and the occasional harrassment of broken troops or laying blast markers to prep for usually air assault. the use of bombers is very small, and the aircraft rules do not reflect the manner in which aircraft fight.
Dobbsy wrote:
Yes there is. It's so airpower does not become a major focus of the game, in a game where airpower is a minor focus.
that is a very strange sentiment from someone who refuses to consider making marine armies follow the same 33% restriction on aircraft that everyone else does, because doing so would unfairly limit the amount of aircraft a marine list can take (in conjunction to their many titans of course)
it is possible, at the moment, for a player to take a warlord titan, spending a significant number of points and impacting largely on the way both his and his opponents army plays. it's distressing to see how titans have become a major focus of the game when they should be a minor one. maybe we should make it so that titan formations can only attack non-titan formations if those formations have first fired upon the titan that turn. to help bring epics focus back to the purity of its original roots.
CAL001 wrote:
Hey Kim,
Excellent report mate, can you tell me what program you used to create the maps mate?
Cheers
Aaron
Hey Cal
Maps were made using the Vassal module. I can send a few links your way if you'd like