Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Nightwatch wrote:You'll notice that Saim-Hann isn't doing very well. The reason is not that it's Eldar, but rather that everyone ganged up and hit hard. I think we will see a continuation of these sort of tactics. To make an attack effective, you only need to get enough people that more wounds are inflicted than the army can recover in one turn. In fact, I'd say that Eldar have the highest chance of escaping this kind of attack, because they can run away the farthest, with no restrictions. Of course, this would be magnified in a 6 world board.

On this board, there isn't really anywhere for the Eldar going to run to. If it were 7 points on a line, I could see it. But not like things are right now.

I agree. 5 points in a ring do make the Eldar less likely to survive. 7 points on a line would make them too powerful and kill everyone else.

You raise some good points, Shaman, which have also troubled me. I don't like how long a game might currently take. Of course, I would have gone after the potential monsters first. Overall, this game assumes players will actually communicate with each other and that takes time. I am not keen to up everyone's attack as a fix at this point. I would also like to point out that the current faction rules work against fellow Ork and Tau as much as they work for them. It doesn't really limit anyone's choices. I have spotted a problem with "Masters of the Webway"--it makes Eldar basically immune to Nids and IG. I'm not sure if this is such a terrible problem, however. Should force both factions to reach out to others, although this not what I really wanted for Nids. Comments on this, if you please.

Manchu wrote:You raise some good points, Shaman, which have also troubled me. I don't like how long a game might currently take. Of course, I would have gone after the potential monsters first. Overall, this game assumes players will actually communicate with each other and that takes time. I am not keen to up everyone's attack as a fix at this point. I would also like to point out that the current faction rules work against fellow Ork and Tau as much as they work for them. It doesn't really limit anyone's choices. I have spotted a problem with "Masters of the Webway"--it makes Eldar basically immune to Nids and IG. I'm not sure if this is such a terrible problem, however. Should force both factions to reach out to others, although this not what I really wanted for Nids. Comments on this, if you please.

I agree, Nids should be able to function competently without alliances. It won't work, and I think the game is pretty good as it is right now.

There are too few worlds, which needs changing. The game length isn't really possible to fix, as we're playing internationally. Just leave it alone and there will be no problems, though some people might get bored.

Manchu wrote:it makes Eldar basically immune to Nids and IG.

How so? If Eldar want to attack either of them, they'll be counterattacked.

Manchu wrote:I think I have a solution for Eldar:

Masters of the Webway: Eldar factions begin the game off-Board and may be placed on any World of their choice on Turn 1. They may then attack once. This counts as their entire turn for Turn 1. Subsequently, Eldar may move then attack then move each turn. These moves are not bound by normal movement order: Eldar factions may move to any World.

M* , A , M*

vs

M1 or
A1

IMO

Nightwatch wrote:

You'll notice that Saim-Hann isn't doing very well. The reason is not that it's Eldar, but rather that everyone ganged up and hit hard. I think we will see a continuation of these sort of tactics. To make an attack effective, you only need to get enough people that more wounds are inflicted than the army can recover in one turn. In fact, I'd say that Eldar have the highest chance of escaping this kind of attack, because they can run away the farthest, with no restrictions. Of course, this would be magnified in a 6 world board.

I believe you are wrong. Saim Hann was targeted because it has low wounds and can only reinforce 1. I targeted black templars in the beginning for similar reasons. These armies can get randomly attacked and then become very weak. Blood in the water so to speak. It is not the same for the larger wound armies they can easily recover from random attacks.

JohnHwangDD wrote:
OK, then generalize it so that any army can reinforce any other army by one.

No, the issue is that too may players are reinforcing instead of attacking. Why? Because attacks are strong in this game, so people are trying to hide and escape notice.

Rising attack to 3 average? Why not simply have everybody start at 5 and attack 3?

On alliance benefits, I guess I am just against alliances having any advantage other then mutual cooperation. I think it will make the game more defensive. "Too many players are reinforcing..." Thats my point. hiding and escaping notice is boring. Your final suggestion at the end is extreme.

Manchu wrote:You raise some good points, Shaman, which have also troubled me. I don't like how long a game might currently take. Of course, I would have gone after the potential monsters first. Overall, this game assumes players will actually communicate with each other and that takes time. I am not keen to up everyone's attack as a fix at this point. I would also like to point out that the current faction rules work against fellow Ork and Tau as much as they work for them. It doesn't really limit anyone's choices. I have spotted a problem with "Masters of the Webway"--it makes Eldar basically immune to Nids and IG. I'm not sure if this is such a terrible problem, however. Should force both factions to reach out to others, although this not what I really wanted for Nids. Comments on this, if you please.

Yeah perhaps it is too much. I just think that the game relies too much on people communicating and following orders and whenever anything goes wrong, nothing happens. For example 3 CSM would be required to whittle an IG player down, thats serious planning to just whittle one player down not obliterate, whittle. I have no doubt this game will end in a stalemate if the final players play smart. I probably wouldn't play smart and perish but I am unlikely to make it to the end.

1hadhq wrote:

DarkHound wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:This strengthens faction play.

But is that actually good for the game? I think it'd be better not to reward faction play to, if not encourage, atleast allow mixing the alliances up. If you gain an advantage from staying with your own faction, there is no reason not to; there won't be any betrayals, or alliances based on placement.

QFT.

Faction play leads to bad feelings.
I'd prefer player based alliances.

Inquisitor_Syphonious wrote:Proposed rule, just throwing it out there, from my d&d time:

Attacks of opportunity:
If a faction moves through an occupied sector, ONE of the armies inside of the sector may automatically deal one damage to the faction moving through if the defender posts it within one hour of the attackers turn. This only applies to moving through, not into.

Eldar would ignore it since they teleport

That would put the slight hinderance on the space marines, which look like the kings of game one.

It will also give Eldar a perk, which is what all the eldar players want.

Thoughts? Flaming?

The D&D rule isn't bad if everyone can move 2 or more.
Without the final settings of the new faction, let me assume its SM only that get hit.
Q1: May every local "defender" choose to do 1 wound?
Q2: is it balanced to use a 1 hour restriction in a game with participants of different timezones?
Q3: You mean the dead kings like Erasoketa?

Inquisitor_Syphonious wrote:Ork Waaagh!
The warboss instills fearlessness into his boyz, and calls a waagh. The boyz surge forward with renewed vigor!

Once per game, (maybe two-three times) Orks may increase their movement by one for the duration of the day (or two?).

Just a thought.

Do they have to debate who's waaghboss? Maybe suffer a wound ( representing the 'discussion' ) to start the waagh?

Q1: Right in there, only one army can do it.
Q2: Sure, mostly because there are alot of defenders in the sectors after the beginning turns.
Q3: That was just because he was trying to crusade.

Maybe, take one wound, from a leader figure dying, then they have an extra movement for two game turns?

Right now, as it is, eldar need some boosting, the marines will chase them down, bludgeoning them, while the guard or other allys wait to blast them as they pass by.

Inquisitor_Syphonious wrote:

Right now, as it is, eldar need some boosting, the marines will chase them down, bludgeoning them, while the guard or other allies wait to blast them as they pass by.

You did notice the eldar put a price on the Space marines heads, PRE-game.
Was there a choice to keep the weapons stowed away? I think so, without the bet on our heads.
Marines won't stop chasing whatever endangers their precious geneseed.

There's already a request to let him run and escape ( for some time ). Would that change anything?
Could delay my next move and wait for the decisions of others in this case.
(would also improve the post with proper formatting)
IDK, if a group has only "kill da spase marinez" to say, why should the SM listen?
Why should SM not hunt down those who cannot imagine the SM as possible allies?
Is there a reason to think IG has a natural alliance with SM and lump them into 1 faction, without considering the players as independent persons, able to have their own goals ? Isn't it too easy to generalize?
Orkz and chaos do benefit from the "blood in the water" as Shaman put it.
Why should they forfeit their chance to catch a faster faction on the run?

The Eldar can have their piece of pie, but don't expect to grab the pie, run away with it and eat it alone.....

Manchu's edits to M*/A/M* is already a boost at the coming greater playfield.

No mercy, put him out of his misery.

1hadhq wrote:You did notice the eldar put a price on the Space marines heads, PRE-game.

Indeed, but then what came first?

EF started with an anti-Eldars post, it's perfectly fair to respond in kind with an anti-Imps post.

It's really funny, but in these games, you simply can't spell "selective memory", "incomplete information" or "hypocrite" without "1hadhq"...

The only thing keeping Imps from allying with xenos and traitors are preconceived notions that have little place on the tabeltop and less space here.

EF's was a jab yours was an outright challenge. I can see why you responded that way though.

I was also thinking about a rule to make things more killy.. just a thought..

Desperate Measures

Attacker may inflict an extra wound on one target but loses one wound in the process. In addition the attacker may make no reinforcement in the turn of the attack or the turn following it.

So it gives you that extra punch to finish some one off but leaves you vulnerable for a turn after.

Thoughts?

Though I seem to be the only one who wants things to die quicker. lol.

Oh, John, Such friendly words to adress me.... I am soooo happy.

Maybe there is a difference to this little gem:

JohnHwangDD:
OK, BS, there are 4 Imp heads to take as trophies. I think Xenos can take more Imp heads (skulls) than CSM.

Or Orkzes, for that matter.

What say you to a little competition here?

Aiming for fewer Eldar or zer0 IG or SM. Not really the best way to keep it calm.

And why did Erasoketa have to suffer from EF's post?
EF isn't the spokesman of every possible player of SM , IG or any other faction of the IoM present in a game.
Its still your idea of a monolithic block of Imperialists that stands between a free choice of all players and your beloved black&white scheme of things.

Shaman wrote:
Though I seem to be the only one who wants things to die quicker. lol.

No its ok. Total annihilation is acceptable as outcome.

...

When did JohnHwangDD become four eldar players?

Should we require this at the end of his posts?

**Disclaimer-JohnHwangDD's views do not symbolize the views of the eldar community as a whole.**

Inquisitor_Syphonious wrote:...

When did JohnHwangDD become four eldar players?

Should we require this at the end of his posts?

**Disclaimer-JohnHwangDD's views do not symbolize the views of the eldar community as a whole.**

He has a distinctive avatar and every post is about eldar. I don't think the disclaimer would help.

Shaman, desperate measures sounds like it would be really great for Nids and IG. How do you see that shaking out?

I think its funny you think its for the two armies that as I see it don't need the help.. haha.

I actually thought of it for chaos but gave it a generic name for everyone.

Shaking out Um just as I wrote it above. Get all the vocal chaps to weigh in and tell us what they think.

I think giving a special rule like that just to a couple of armies is the wrong way to go about it.

But ideas popped into my head so I list them..

If you were going to do that you might give eldar an evacuation ability that caused one wound but let them be off the board for a day. The one wound would be those left behind.

Or orks an ability to destabilize a sector causing two wounds to themselves but one to everyone else in their sector. The two wounds would be the orks spreading out everywhere.

Or tyranids a shadow in the warp ability that traps people in the sector with them but causes one wound for some reason I can't think of.

...

Shaman wrote:He has a distinctive avatar and every post is about eldar.

Someone "stole" my avatar here...

[rant]Why can't people make their own avatars?!? [/rant]
____

Manchu wrote:Shaman, desperate measures sounds like it would be really great for Nids and IG.

I see Desperate Measures as a Dark Eldar / Eldar / Chaos thing, myself.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Shaman wrote:He has a distinctive avatar and every post is about eldar.

Someone "stole" my avatar here...

[rant]Why can't people make their own avatars?!? [/rant]

Wait someone stole your eldrad avatar? The one you painted.. no way. Im serious really? Was it a HBMC alt a/c or something haha.

Usually I steal avatars from other forums.. Though I cropped this one.

Shaman wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:No, the issue is that too may players are reinforcing instead of attacking.

On alliance benefits, I guess I am just against alliances having any advantage other then mutual cooperation. I think it will make the game more defensive.

"Too many players are reinforcing..." Thats my point. hiding and escaping notice is boring.

If you can get help from allies, then you are free to attack in the expectation that an ally will reinforce you as promised...

For a perfect example, earlier, Vostroyans attack Night Lords 1, attack World Eaters 1, attack Red Corsairs 1, Reinforce 1, asks Cadia to support. Instead of supporting Vostroya by doing the same (hitting all 3 CSM and reinforcing 1), however, Cadia throws it away to reinforce by 2, while moving away to split the IG.

That is absolutely *horrible* gameplay. If I were EF, I'd be hopping mad.

Well, I can understand his hesitation, the Admiral took a bit of a beating with the arrival of the Chaos scum, and may have moved off in order to come back with every intention of helping later. Or maybe he's made an alliance further north in the ring...

BTW, "Imperials" aren't a faction any than there is a "Team Xenos". Eldar are a faction, and they DO have the most players.

In regards to the M*, A, M*, I think that makes Eldar literally impossible to catch for everyone. M*, A, M1 sounds better to me.

Also, no one can diss JDD's new avatar. No one.

Emperors Faithful wrote:Also, no one can diss JDD's new avatar. No one.

JDD's new avatar is really annoying.

Someone struck again, look at templork's avatar if you know what I mean...

Emperors Faithful wrote:Well, I can understand his hesitation, the Admiral took a bit of a beating with the arrival of the Chaos scum,

BTW, "Imperials" aren't a faction any than there is a "Team Xenos". Eldar are a faction, and they DO have the most players

So naturally, he's not going to do anything about it, rather than hitting back?

You say that, but nobody believes you because we all know that Imperials should team - that's the point of being in a related faction. If there were Dark Eldar, Harlies, or Exodites on the board, you bet we'd play as a combined Eldar team until non-Eldar forces are removed.
____

Nightwatch wrote:

Emperors Faithful wrote:Also, no one can diss JDD's new avatar. No one.

JDD's new avatar is really annoying.

Then perhaps you should adblock the JPG, lest it corrupt your mind with impure thoughts...


@IS: yeah, blatant theft!

I was curious so I searched "templork" all I got was this thread. Ghost poster?

JohnHwangDD wrote:
*snip*

If there is an Imperial side after all, you can bet your buttocks that there's also an Anti-Imperial side as well. And you appear to be the Ringleader in all cases.

Shaman wrote:I was curious so I searched "templork" all I got was this thread. Ghost poster?

The name was typo'd: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/301465.page#1704283
____

Emperors Faithful wrote: If there is an Imperial side after all, you can bet your buttocks that there's also an Anti-Imperial side as well. And you appear to be the Ringleader in all cases.

Nah, I'm just vocal.

Well while you guys are continuing your off topic argument it seems that CSM and the Orks have formed an alliance.

You guys have fun wit dat.


@ Manchu- I would like for you to reconsider my hordes hitting max and splitting into two half- strength factions controlled by the same general idea. While not necessarily for the IG, I still could see this as the tyranid rule in a game they should never have allies.

As to the other ideas, I like some of them a lot but I think we may be hitting on the max level of complexity for an internet survivor game.

As to the game boards, who is to say that you can't develope both the circular and linear. Same game but differing dynamics depending upon the playing field.

I also thought about the number of worlds and if it makes life easier then just set the number at 6. No modifiers, just 6 worlds.