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.

So I have just played a few games of Dust Warfare and have read through all of the rules including the new Zverogard book.

I want to discuss what people think of the rules good and bad.

The spoiler is my opinion so don't read it if you don't want to be baised. I want this thread to be an open discussion about the rules. I know someone will be able to point out something that I haven't seen or have misread and I don't want my opinion to keep them from speaking out.



To get the ball rolling let's talk about the army creation. It is simple to understand and put an army together. Yet, it offers a multitude of choices.

How it works for those who haven't read the rules yet. You set a total army value 150 ap for smaller games, 400 ap for larger. Within those points limits you select units according to a platoon organization. Meaning a platoon can have x amount of infantry units which then in turn unlocks x amount of support units. The support units can be vehicles or extra infantry units. Each army[Axis, Allies, SSU] has 2 to 3 different platoons which are in turn lead by different command units or command sections. Each command section dictates what units can be selected for that platoon. Now a players army can be only one platoon but will actually be made of multiple platoons especially at higher game values. This c an lead to some very interesting builds.

To translate what I said to 40k terms, an army can consist of multiple force organisation charts, the minimum you have to bring is an hq choice and a troops choice before you can select other units from another force org chart.

The worst thing I'm finding is how difficult it is to convince long-time 40k players of the importance of suppression. In 40k, you can generally choose whatever you like, with emphasis on causing significant casualties.
In Dust Warfare, you need to fire at specific units in order to neutralise their reactions against you. The game is really about the suppression mechanic, far more than it is about causing a large amount of casualties in a turn.

My least favourite mechanic? lack of templates for flamethrowers and artillery. Whilst the simplicity of the Spray mechanic is laudable, and easily carried from the board game, it is really weird that you can shoot a flamethrower into a 'close combat' situation and not hurt your own troops.

My most favourite mechanic? That fighting in close combat is powerful (if you can make it there) but not dominating or ubiquitous. Fighting back in close combat uses a Reaction, meaning you can't fight back if suppressed or already on overwatch, and you don't often get the annoying situation in 40k where CC units get twice the actions as shooting units, and you often don't want your 40k CC units to win combat...

I would agree with suppression being the most important mechanic in the game. I don't know how many times I have put myself in a situation where if I activated a unit they would get wiped out but putting a suppression on the unit that was close made the difference in a win and loss for me. I do like the fact that there aren't any templates because I find this game has most of the units within the 12" bubble of command range to give orders.

Trasvi wrote:The worst thing I'm finding is how difficult it is to convince long-time 40k players of the importance of suppression. In 40k, you can generally choose whatever you like, with emphasis on causing significant casualties.
In Dust Warfare, you need to fire at specific units in order to neutralise their reactions against you. The game is really about the suppression mechanic, far more than it is about causing a large amount of casualties in a turn.

My least favourite mechanic? lack of templates for flamethrowers and artillery. Whilst the simplicity of the Spray mechanic is laudable, and easily carried from the board game, it is really weird that you can shoot a flamethrower into a 'close combat' situation and not hurt your own troops.

My most favourite mechanic? That fighting in close combat is powerful (if you can make it there) but not dominating or ubiquitous. Fighting back in close combat uses a Reaction, meaning you can't fight back if suppressed or already on overwatch, and you don't often get the annoying situation in 40k where CC units get twice the actions as shooting units, and you often don't want your 40k CC units to win combat...

It has been a pain convincing any 40k player to try dust in my flgs. I do feel that eventually Dust will catch on but kudos to you for getting them to at least try it.

The flaming close combat thing is a little hokey, hopefully they will FAQ it. I do like not having template though, they can be a hassle sometimes.

craniumdamage750 wrote:I would agree with suppression being the most important mechanic in the game. I don't know how many times I have put myself in a situation where if I activated a unit they would get wiped out but putting a suppression on the unit that was close made the difference in a win and loss for me.

I like the fact that suppression adds another level to the game play. You are not limited to just trying to kill the unit. It adds another layer of tactics to the game.

Flaming into combat is not hokey, imo. Your guys just get out of the way. No one is "locked" in combat and it is more representational of reality in that regard, I feel.

I love that I can shoot five guys at five targets, too. My only beef with the game is the dice - but you can use normal ones, so its a moot point really.

How do you use a flamethrower in "close combat"? Its not a "C" range weapon.

FYI, DW used to have templates. The final version of the book removed them. Andy is not happy about this. If you could still build 10 man squads then I can see the lack of templates over-powering, but since that was dropped, I don't mind it in practice.

-K

Korthu wrote:How do you use a flamethrower in "close combat"? Its not a "C" range weapon.

FYI, DW used to have templates. The final version of the book removed them. Andy is not happy about this. If you could still build 10 man squads then I can see the lack of templates over-powering, but since that was dropped, I don't mind it in practice.

-K

A unit not in the cc can fire into it since the rules don't lock down the units. Each cc weapon has an affective range of 3 inches. Very different from 40k where every model must line up with other models.

Also the SSU can have 10 man squads lol.

The SSU can do 11-12 man squads, which are horrifying.

Yakov or Yana with a Commissar for Badass combining a pair of CC Squads?! EFFING NASTY!

I'm trying to figure out the best way to house rule this into the perfect skirmish game.

Ideas I'm toying with:

* ~100 point games (1 Hero/Leader + 2 Units of troops + 1 walker)
* Unit Coherency is no longer required (if a unit is > 6" from leader and gets two suppression tokens its moral breaks and it runs) (Going to use a 6" circle template to check).
* Drop the orders phase (ie: all actions can be reacted too)
* Orders from initiative phase are only usable by Hero/Leader within 12" and allow either promotion of new leader in unit or additional action.
* Snap to Cover (free < 1" move to any terrain edge/corner once per turn per model)

set this up in a 30" x 30" city fight terrain board with objectives.

Really i just wish there was a rainbow six tactical minis game.

I know these rules arnt really that thought out but I was curious

PittedPanda wrote:
I'm trying to figure out the best way to house rule this into the perfect skirmish game.

Really i just wish there was a rainbow six tactical minis game.

I know these rules arnt really that thought out but I was curious

Have you played Infinity, the whole thing plays like a first person shooter.

Got into Dust a while ago for the models and initially for Tactics, only recently tried out a Warfare session. And I gotta say: I love it! As someone mentioned before, the Suppression mechanic adds a neat layer of depth to the game. Plus, the system of reactions imho helps to mitigate that issue that tens to plague the standard IGYG system of "I go second, and I got decimated...I have no one left to fire" (which at its worse can put a player in a permanent disadvantage downward spiral). I'm still absorbing the armor and cover rules (which I always mix up from tactics) - for the most part they work and are serviceable, but nothing special. I will say though the only thing that bugs me (in both Warfare and Tactics), Flamethrowers do an awful lot of damage to Vehicles on their weapon lines...are those values right?

 Kaiserbudheim wrote:
I will say though the only thing that bugs me (in both Warfare and Tactics), Flamethrowers do an awful lot of damage to Vehicles on their weapon lines...are those values right?

Yes. You do realize that a burning jet of fuel will go into the vision slits of a tank and leak into hatches and various engine compartments and do lots of damage - but only if the guy hits the tank just right (not on the front or sides, where its mostly armor and tracks, etc). This is why they are 1/4 - you get a 33% chance to hit and if you do, you do four damage. However, a lot of vehicles get 3+ dice to stop some damage, meaning it shouldn't outright wreck anything beyond a Light Walker now and again.

Its not as damaging as it seems, in other words.

Ahh true good call about the armor saves mitigating the damage potential. I forget that you're really only banking on one flame weapon (usually) from an attacking squad or vehicle. However, flame weapons are really overpowered in the Tactics game seeing there's only cover saves, and no Armor saves. There being able to do 4 points to a class 7 Armor Vehicle seems to be pretty off. I suppose that is what helps make Tactics more brutal and much faster!