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.

 Alfndrate wrote:

I get that, but you're suggesting deviations based on x number of inches, which is basically where we were (except it's a solid number instead of based on the number of dice). and while I don't think it was a completely serious suggestion (but still one nonetheless) you're suggesting a deviation for things out of line of sight... That's adding in too much randomness imo...

If you want simplified siege engines, you pick x point within the range of the weapon, and it deviates from there, following all normal deviation rules.. so a 10 on the die would land where the marker is...

That's exactly what I am suggesting, but with more than a single deviation. My problem isn't that much the random part of it, then the steps in the random distance. With the actual method, there is as much randomness, if not more, but it's in a straight line, followed by another random element, a single deviation roll.

My suggestion of x dice per y inches could be put into a table. I wrote 15 in my example, but anything could work, even the old table translated into fixed range (up to 10 = 1 die, 11 to 30 = 2 dice, 31 to 50 = 3 dice).

In the end, the trebuchet is really random, and on top of that still have to hit its target. Looking at the shots made during the game at Templecon, except the one to send the hamsters up the field, it wasn't worth it at all. It could benefit from a little bit more precision.

 Tonio wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:

I get that, but you're suggesting deviations based on x number of inches, which is basically where we were (except it's a solid number instead of based on the number of dice). and while I don't think it was a completely serious suggestion (but still one nonetheless) you're suggesting a deviation for things out of line of sight... That's adding in too much randomness imo...

If you want simplified siege engines, you pick x point within the range of the weapon, and it deviates from there, following all normal deviation rules.. so a 10 on the die would land where the marker is...

That's exactly what I am suggesting, but with more than a single deviation. My problem isn't that much the random part of it, then the steps in the random distance. With the actual method, there is as much randomness, if not more, but it's in a straight line, followed by another random element, a single deviation roll.

My suggestion of x dice per y inches could be put into a table. I wrote 15 in my example, but anything could work, even the old table translated into fixed range (up to 10 = 1 die, 11 to 30 = 2 dice, 31 to 50 = 3 dice).

In the end, the trebuchet is really random, and on top of that still have to hit its target. Looking at the shots made during the game at Templecon, except the one to send the hamsters up the field, it wasn't worth it at all. It could benefit from a little bit more precision.

It must be the hour of the night, but I'm not sure what exactly you're suggesting...
So... you want me to say... roll 1 die of deviation per 15 inches away I wish to place the marker? (the 15 could be substituted for anything)

So I wish to drop my template 45 inches away, I would have to roll 3 deviation dice?


Edit: I'm picking this up tomorrow... night

 Alfndrate wrote:

It must be the hour of the night, but I'm not sure what exactly you're suggesting...
So... you want me to say... roll 1 die of deviation per 15 inches away I wish to place the marker? (the 15 could be substituted for anything)

So I wish to drop my template 45 inches away, I would have to roll 3 deviation dice?

That's exactly what I have in mind. Choose a point, deviate from there, a number of time based on distance. Nothing more.

You don't roll for the distance, you simply chose a point. More deviation, true, but no random distance. That's the idea anyway.

 Alfndrate wrote:
For the most part, 2nd edition Brushfire isn't different from 1st Edition Brushfire...

Way to make a sale!

 Casey's Law wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:
For the most part, 2nd edition Brushfire isn't different from 1st Edition Brushfire...

Way to make a sale!

You've already got a free copy

But yeah, we don't feel the game needs to be completely torn down and rebuilt.. just cleaned up. The primary rules are the same, the biggest changes are in the units themselves.

So you don't want the Beta testers to buy a copy when it's done:

Well I'm refraining judgement until it's further along. I definitely don't want the whole game to change I'd just like to see some balance by the end. Anything that helps me convince my friends to start ttwargaming with this over other systems.

I like the alternative "distance = deviation" concept. I'll see about writing up a variant for the cannon and trebuchet.

I'd also like folks to try the current 2.0 rules about as well, the y are slightly different I from the originals.

As a side note about templecon, watching ritides' trebuchet rolls: the "guess ranges" were all spot on target BEFORE deviations. Those are what ruined their usefulness.

I would like to say some more about siege engines exemplars, lack of unit upgrades and army building. I have only look after this on a few armies, but...

Seems like taking six or seven 5 food basic troops(the 3 free upgrade kind) just automatically unlocks a place for an exemplar. These units cost only food while exemplars mostly cost non-food. At this point there is nothing else the player can do but take an exemplar.

In the first edition here the player was able to choose to upgrade it's troops or take the exemplar. The choice was valid because these simple canon fodders became really powerful when they got upgraded. This came especially handy if you didn't had the exemplar model. You had an other valid choice.

The bigger troops (cavarly, elites) seems to have balanced costs when they are fully upgraded between the resurces, but one will mostly have basic troops in it's enlistment, creating a place for an exemplar after every 6 of them. I'm not sure if an exemplar woth it over a flag and a horn, but it propably is. Vandaland exemplars are.

Once you run out of exemplars, you left with fortifications or siege machines. It's better to take them than nothing after all. I don't yet know if this is a real threat, but it might be.

Meaning, in a 25 point match you have a choice to take one exemplar or flag and horn and maybe a granate or something.
On an 50-60 point match you are forced to have an exemplar because what else do you enlist? It's still small scale for a siege weapon. After that you can have equipment or an another exemplar. You can take the stronger troops but only a few of them. So more basic troops with their free equipment are probably a better choice.

It's a bigger problem when you don't have the models either, which is kinda how the game is now. There is only a few released exemplars (I only remember one). but you are forced to have them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
For example, in axony, you take Bull Regulars, Devons and Highlanders. All of them costs more food than anything else even fully upgraded. Even the Kernish Terrier only cost 10 food and 10 lumber fully upgraded.

What else you going to do with the rest of the resources than enlisting the experts?

WhiteRoo what edition of the rulebook are you looking at?

Note: In first edition, unless you plan out your upgrades very specifically, you're always going to have more costs in food than you will in the other two resources, that's why horns, banners, siege weapons, and exemplars exist.

WhiteRoo, Kernish Terriers are 5fd with no upgrades available in either edition. Bearded Highlanders are 10fd with a Targe available to them with a 10lr upgrade. In 1st edition they were able to use the Claymore with the Targe, this no longer seems to be the case.

Lately this thread seems to be turning into another 2nd Ed. discussion thread. Some of this talk might be better in the playtest feedback.

I might switched the two up, but I want to say is now exemplars aren't just a necessity, there is no way avoiding them.

A siege machine is not that useful as an exemplar so that's not a choice. Banners and horns can be bought of whatever gold and lumber you can't spend on exemplars. There is no way one will not enlist an exemplar.

Well, I guess it's not against the rules to not spend all the resurces after all...

 Alfndrate wrote:
In 1st edition they were able to use the Claymore with the Targe, this no longer seems to be the case.

Claymore is a 1HD weapon, Targe is a 1 HD Shield; there is no restriction to attacking with the Claymore and doing a shield base.

I just got this idea and I want to share it.

What if you can hire better crew for a siege machine that increases it's effectiveness?

There are a few things that do that, or cause a similar effect; like Sean of the Experts, the various Weapon Team units, or Aquitar's Hand Mortar units.

Attaching a Higher RS model to the siege weapon will also increase its effectiveness as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
One possible thought though

What if Deviation is reduced by the operator's RS?

Ex. Otter Ashigaru are manning a Trebuchet, they have a RS of 4. You roll a 7 to Deviate, and reduce it by 4 to because a Deviation of only 3".

That would cause a lot more "bullseye" hit. You see, face values of 1 to 4 as well as the 10 would cause the templat to not deviate. Also having a horn - what the asigaru surely have - will make that RS a 7, so it's mostly would not deviate and on a really bad roll, 3 inches.

This would not help the Xd10 roll to be any more accurate tought.

 WhiteRoo wrote:
I just got this idea and I want to share it.

What if you can hire better crew for a siege machine that increases it's effectiveness?

Its certainly an interesting idea though it'd be the thing I target first lol . But definitely not a bad idea.

Cyp, I know thats how 40k does it, and its one if the things I like... I would suggest the most common RS be used or highest if there is a tie.

But we're getting off topic

I like the idea by the way and it sulrey would help the siege weapons.

WhiteRoo wrote:That would cause a lot more "bullseye" hit. You see, face values of 1 to 4 as well as the 10 would cause the templat to not deviate. Also having a horn - what the asigaru surely have - will make that RS a 7, so it's mostly would not deviate and on a really bad roll, 3 inches.

This would not help the Xd10 roll to be any more accurate tought.

I think we're going to go with Tonio's idea of giving a 10-60" range, with a number of deviations based on how far you shoot. This idea would build off that then.

 Alfndrate wrote:
Cyp, I know thats how 40k does it, and its one if the things I like... I would suggest the most common RS be used or highest if there is a tie.

The highest most common is the way its done in Brushfire as well.

I like that suggestion. Even if the template is slightly more precise, there still is the RS roll to do anyway. It won't end up sniping models.

It would be scary if you could snipe with a trebuchet.

I'll be happy just knowing what side of the board the template will likely end up in . Great discussion on this!

 RiTides wrote:
I'll be happy just knowing what side of the board the template will likely end up in . Great discussion on this!

Nope, I'm writing it in that you have to use the old rules Mustn't let those flying hamsters become too accurate

 Tonio wrote:
I like that suggestion. Even if the template is slightly more precise, there still is the RS roll to do anyway. It won't end up sniping models.

Looking at it again, I still like the concept, BUT I'm not sure it fits with Brushfire, because of the stats variability (is that a word?) and the way deviation works.

In 40k, most troopers have between 2 and 4 BS (shooting stat) with some crackshot having 5 or 6, and deviation is 2d6"-BS. In general, even good shots will still deviate on average.

In Brushfire, most factions have access to trooper with RS of 3 or 4. Also, the new ruling use the highest RS of the activating squad, instead of the highest average (probably to simplify the part about exemplars/heroes from 1st), so two cheap troop and a cheap exemplar/hero with a high RS is easy to add. On top of that, you have some Horn and Heroic Actions that might help your BS also. So it's not hard to get to RS 6 or higher. As the max deviation per roll is 9 (10 being a hit), it makes the trebuchet a really precise item. Combining that with the fact that you use the same high RS to do your to hit RS rolls, trebuchet sniping which I was joking about earlier, could become a thing.

I do like the "RS reducing deviation" idea, but it needs works right now, if you do go with placing the target and multiple deviations roll by distance. Maybe reducing deviation by half of the RS could work? Or using the worst RS for deviation, but highest for RS rolls? (That still could easily by a 6 or 7, with good basic crew and the horn). Any other idea?

Yeah, and 40k is not a skirmish game is it? Brushfire is supposed to be a skirmish game and not a game that can simulate a really big battle. Altough it may can provided the participants have enugh models and time, but even a 300 unit game is only 60 models per side top, so simulating Warhammer Fantasy scale battles is not the goal here right?

Brushfire is a Skirmish to Army level game.

So getting my thread back on topic....

What would everyone like to see in the Brushfire Tournement at the Warstore Weekend?

 Catyrpelius wrote:
So getting my thread back on topic....

What would everyone like to see in the Brushfire Tournement at the Warstore Weekend?

Participants... >_>