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.

We tried our first team game today--and I have pretty mixed reactions. First, I want to make sure we understand this right. It was a 2v2--and from what we understood the sequence is;

Team 1 Player A Goes
Team 2 Player A Goes
Team 1 Player B Goes
Team 2 Player B Goes
All of the above constitutes a game round


Now, if that is correct--it does seem Feats become a bit stronger. One of my friends was attempting to explain this to me and at the time I couldn't get it in my gut--but after thinking a bit more about it--I understand what he is saying. Since you only get to react to a Feat with effectively half your army after it is thrown--then the opposing force gets another turn--feats that last a round seems to have more of a "not on paper" affect in the game. The specific combo that was done during our game was a Knock Down Feat + Spend Fury/Focus Take d6 Damage Feat. It was pretty devastating and kind of ruined the game.

Are we doing this right---or...?

You're doing the sequencing correctly. As to how long the feat lasts that depends on the feat's wording. If it says that it lasts for a turn then player A's feat will last until his next turn. However player B's feat will only last until the begining of player A's turn. If the feat is instantaneous then you pop it and that's that. I can't think of any feats that aren't one or the other but they may exist. Just think of a team's turn as just that a single turn where 2 people are moving their models with a bit of interruption from the other team.

AgeOfEgos wrote:We tried our first team game today--and I have pretty mixed reactions. First, I want to make sure we understand this right. It was a 2v2--and from what we understood the sequence is;

Team 1 Player A Goes
Team 2 Player A Goes
Team 1 Player B Goes
Team 2 Player B Goes
All of the above constitutes a game round


Now, if that is correct--it does seem Feats become a bit stronger. One of my friends was attempting to explain this to me and at the time I couldn't get it in my gut--but after thinking a bit more about it--I understand what he is saying. Since you only get to react to a Feat with effectively half your army after it is thrown--then the opposing force gets another turn--feats that last a round seems to have more of a "not on paper" affect in the game. The specific combo that was done during our game was a Knock Down Feat + Spend Fury/Focus Take d6 Damage Feat. It was pretty devastating and kind of ruined the game.

Are we doing this right---or...?

Depends.

At Adepticon and most other places I've seen two player team games they run
like the 40k team tournament. That is, you get an allotted time to move both armies.
The difference is, because activation order is so important to warmachine, there is no
way you can simultaneously activate models to speed things up.

A team game I played randomized who would go next. There were four cards, one each representing a player. We'd pick the cards to see who would go in what order.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:You're doing the sequencing correctly. As to how long the feat lasts that depends on the feat's wording. If it says that it lasts for a turn then player A's feat will last until his next turn. However player B's feat will only last until the begining of player A's turn. If the feat is instantaneous then you pop it and that's that. I can't think of any feats that aren't one or the other but they may exist. Just think of a team's turn as just that a single turn where 2 people are moving their models with a bit of interruption from the other team.

I'm sorry but I'm still not clear on that. Why wouldn't Player B's feat last until the start of his next turn? For example, the wording on page 42;

"For game effects, a round is measured from the current player's turn to the beginning of his next turn regardless of his location in the turn order. A game effect with a duration of one round expires at the beginning of the current player's turn."

Emphasis mine. So take Doomshaper's Feat--it states it lasts for One Round. Based off the above wording, it wouldn't matter if he went as Player A or Player B--it is in effect until he starts his next turn. So if he was player B on Team 1 it would go;

Player B Team 1 Casts Feat
Player B Team 2 is under its effect
Player A Team 1 activates while the enemy is under its effect
Player A Team 2 is under its effect
Player B Team 1 activates--Feat is now finished

This is basically what happened today. He cast his feat--then on my next activation I moved up and used knocked down. So now a 'large' portion of their army couldn't shake off or use focus without taking quite a bit of damage. It was pretty much game ending.

malfred wrote:

Depends.

At Adepticon and most other places I've seen two player team games they run
like the 40k team tournament. That is, you get an allotted time to move both armies.
The difference is, because activation order is so important to warmachine, there is no
way you can simultaneously activate models to speed things up.

Do you mean---both players would activate their models at the same time? So for example, 'our turn' we take turns activating our units/Warlocks--then the other team does the same to its entire army?

djphranq wrote:A team game I played randomized who would go next. There were four cards, one each representing a player. We'd pick the cards to see who would go in what order.

Hah, that sounds like fun--although a bit zany.

Yes. All of a team's models would activate then the other team
would get their turn.

So if we were a team, you could activate your Gatormen, I
could then activate my Severius and after that you could
activate your Bog Trogs.

etc.

At my FLGS we've always read the passage you quoted as meaning it doesn't matter whether the player went first or second in the turn even though the turn ended the effect(s) from the second player don't. So we play a 2 v2 just like I said treating it as one big turn with player A representing the start of his team's turn.
I see how you are reading this and I went to PP's forum to see if I could find anything regarding the situation but I couldn't.

PGs are telling me you can activate in any order on your team at most events.

Ok, I appreciate the help/posts fellas.

I think next time we do teams we'll do it as "One big turn" with each team activating all of their units before it's the 'next player's/team' turn. That seems more coherent, inclusive and fun. I also think I'll do some research on team scenarios.

Today's game wasn't much fun using the in book team mechanic. Reasons why;

A round--was a long wait. It consisted of one person playing his feat/turn---then waiting through 3 other activations until it was back to him. Most of the game was waiting.
It essentially makes round long feats/effects last 4 activations.
The scenarios seem off in larger games--today we played Gauntlet and I don't see how you could clear the box to score with 70 pts of models being thrown around.
It's much harder to coordinate team combinations--as anything you wanted to happen in the same 'round' had to be spoken out loud--else your teammate could move and block your own movement before your activation. Obviously enemy spies abound when you talk at the table....

My store doesn't have a PG to even answer question for us. We either have to figure it out ourselves or wait till someone gets an online answer.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:My store doesn't have a PG to even answer question for us. We either have to figure it out ourselves or wait till someone gets an online answer.

Well, the thing we've found from Privateer Press is this;

Yes, the answer can sometimes be difficult to mine from the book. However, when you do eventually uncover the page--the wording is so specific--you can tell they wrote the rule in the manner they did, expecting you to visit.

I find any non-1v1 games really awkward, and last way longer and go way slower than multiple smaller games. However, if you want to try, the Unbound rules would be a good place to start, though that's really designed for 3+ battlegroups per side.