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.

Siege weapons are not really about precision, but messing up blocks of troops (especially those in heavy armor) and destroying fortifications. You are wasting siege weapons on single targets.

Something else:

I have noticed that the amout of upgrade equipment is dramatically dropped. I will research this, but I have the theory of If I spend X X X amount of resource on my army, I can upgrade every unit to the maximum and still have a large portion of the wood and lumber remain.

I no longer have to choose between taking the exemplar or upgrading my units.

My 25 resource Vandalands warband is costs 25 food and nothing else(3 Rat Raiders, one Hamster berserker). I can't upgrade the rat raiders anymore, and because -let's say it's a beginner match- I want to keep a low model count(so I don't fatherland it), it's 25 lumber and 25 gold to equip the hero. I dont have the choice I had. I just take everything.

And there is no strategy in that.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Blocks of troops will not exist when there is an enemy siege weapon around. I'll just keep my troops at maximum - 3 inch - cohesion, and wish you good luck with hitting more than one at a time.

You still have choices on the Rat Raiders, do they get a Poleax, Targe, or Medium Armor? Its the same strategy as before, but now you have a few more resources to throw on siege weapons, fortifications, and exemplars.

Each army gets at least one troop that gets the 'Pick Equipment/Get Ability' rule, and they are generally going to be a Warband troop as a means to make things easier for new players... since Warbands are the starter sets.

There is perhaps less strategy in low level games, but more flexibility. This also frees up more resources for extraneous upgrades like siege\fortifications. Debate is still open for adding LR\GD to the multiple choice units.

Forcing your troops into particular formations alone seems worth taking a siege weapon, nevermind trebuchets having 5 inch templates.

Additionally, It is harder to hide behind terrain at full cohesion distance. With low walls, shooting armies need to get their models into B2B with it to not provide a cover bonus to what they are shooting at. Much harder get more than 2 models behind it and stay 3" apart. Trenches and Mantlets have the same issue. Siege is a great way to deal with these sorts of setups.

Yeah but that's just one choice. Going upward to my 45 resource wandalands army is the warband plus a Valkyr and a Shrew hussar. The Valkyr cannot be upgraded and the hussar only has a 10 gold upgrade.

I still left with 35 lumber and 25 gold for equipment. According to your competitive rules, only models that are relased can be enlisted in an army. Currently the excess resource will pile high since Exemplars are not relased and even if there is one it's unique. Okay Vandaland can fatherland it, but wha about the others? Well, I think enlisting only lv1 heroes will make some room to buy more equipment, so the bigger the hero limit the more hero will be put in since the horns and banners are really strong.

This might be not that big of a problem that I think it is.

The tournament rules do not exclude the taking of unreleased units.

I guess if the enemy is fortificating then siege weapons are good to have, but I don't see if there would worth to be taken over any exemplar.

Perhaps you wouldn't take them over exemps, but you're also bringing up the issue of having resources left over. I believe these issues solve each other.

Are you saying the only reason to buy siege weapons is because it's nothing else to buy?

In the same manner that the only reason to take more troops is because there is nothing else to buy.

I'd call it "filling out" your army.

In the end, yes I guess...

Feeling like I shouldn't have raised the question...


Since I did bring it up, I'll touch on my own thoughts.
I think the whole siege element is out of place for a skirmish scale game. Traditionally it is an element for huge battles and there is a good reason for that. I think the game would benefit from it's complete removal. (Controversial! )

If it's going to stay then I think it needs to be made so expensive it can only be bought in huge battles. And even then only on a small scale.

I think Exemplars need to be toned down and/or capped off. An ideal solution would be to balance all Exemplars by making them Heroes. If they all operated as fixed point heroes they will be naturally capped off and balanced.

I'd also like to see troops capped on how many weapons they can carry. Two weapons max and only one 2H is a slick solution. Obviously some troops, like Highlanders could still override that.

It would also be nice to see more specialised stat lines for units but a wider variety of equipment choices for each one.

Overall I think the game needs to focus on what scale it's being played at. I'd call it Skirmish+ and I think it needs to be played at about 300pts. That should be around 20 troops which is maybe 4 small squads and 1 to 3 heroes. I think the game also needs to work at around 50 to 150 pts for new players. That'd be a few completely individual models who can each make a serious enough impact on the game.

I think there is nothing wrong with most armies including Exemplars. Exemplars account for maybe 20% of each army list and therefore seem to be intended as a major part of the game. I personally am not a fan of named characters being ubiquitous in competitive/tourneyment lists, but many games, such as Warmachine or Malifaux, are built this way. I prefer the approach used in Brushfire 2nd Ed. of including some Non-Unique Exemplars that act more like a sergeant or powerful specialist for a squad.

Balancing Exemplars out with Seige equipment is difficult. It doesn't help that badass characters with backstory get people more excited than just a ballista with a couple grunts manning it.

 Casey's Law wrote:
Feeling like I shouldn't have raised the question...

Don't worry about it.

 Casey's Law wrote:

Stuff

Siege Weapons are an important aspect of the Napoleonics era, which Brushfire is heavily influenced by.. we just offer the option of playing at smaller levels then a proper Napoleonic battle. They aren't going to go away, but they can easily be ignored if you don't want to use them in your army. Making them more expensive won't really solve any of the 'issues' brought up.

You haven't really presented any reasons for why the Exemplars should be more limited. Most factions only have 2~3, and they are there to enhance a specific troop. The Wanderers and The Experts are an obvious exception for this, they're also slightly cheaper to take and don't have that fantastic of equipment... and are designed to be run together.

Most troops only ever get two weapons, and can only use 2HD worth of them either way. The only way you bypass this restriction is with the few units that have 'natural' attacks (Tusks/Horns/Tail Attacks). The Highlanders still only get to use 2HD worth of weapons, the player just gets to pick what they're using during the Melee Phase.

Not sure what you mean by specialised stat lines with a wider variety of equipment? We're not going to be adding more weapons to things, most of the boxes are bit heavy as is.


300 Resources would be 60 to 30 Troop Models, so alittle larger then just 4 small squads. More akin to a game of Warhammer 40k (Army Level) then say Warmachine (Skirmish+)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galen wrote:
It doesn't help that badass characters with backstory get people more excited than just a ballista with a couple grunts manning it.

So we just need 'Named' Siege Equipment...

... I'll get to writing up "Big Bertha"...

In an way the Exemplar debate comes down to the purpose/intent of the 3 resource system. Food is the primary resource for purchasing troops. Food tends to be the limiting factor in the quantity of models one can field. Lumber and Gold on the other hand seem to be intended to focus your force in one direction or another, modifying various units power, versatility, or specialization.

The complaint almost seems to be that including Exemplars doesn't take away from quantity/quality of standard units.

Siege Weapons are an important aspect of the Napoleonics era, which Brushfire is heavily influenced by.. we just offer the option of playing at smaller levels then a proper Napoleonic battle. They aren't going to go away, but they can easily be ignored if you don't want to use them in your army. Making them more expensive won't really solve any of the 'issues' brought up.

I see the flavour benefit of siege weapons I just can't justify a weapon of that purpose and accuracy being brought out against, by your own definition, 20 enemies at the 'high end'. In this case, the gameplay is far more important than the flavour. As for raising the cost, I feel that raising the cost designates the siege stuff to huge games where they are actually fit for purpose. They'd also have to be more accurate in that solution. I'm talking about something like a 200r cannon that I can offer a pretty decent chance of pulverising the 5 enemies I've sat my template on.

You haven't really presented any reasons for why the Exemplars should be more limited. Most factions only have 2~3, and they are there to enhance a specific troop. The Wanderers and The Experts are an obvious exception for this, they're also slightly cheaper to take and don't have that fantastic of equipment... and are designed to be run together.

Well for starters I, and others, hate using named characters, I hate feeling forced into it even more. My primary reason for wanting Exemplars limited though is because I think they are a powerful but incomparable type. There has to be another equally powerful option, at the very least there has to be a make your own Exemplar feature so I'm not forced into taking The Experts for example. Right now The Experts, for example, compared to the equivalent cost in anything else is ridiculous, they are vastly more powerful. If they are intended as squad leaders then it makes more sense to attach them to the appropriate unit profile.
Overall, I don't see why they aren't classed as heroes. They serve the same purposes, to bolster and/or buff your troops. If they were heroes then there would be no need for people to spend their resources on Exemplars just to match up to the opposition.

Most troops only ever get two weapons, and can only use 2HD worth of them either way. The only way you bypass this restriction is with the few units that have 'natural' attacks (Tusks/Horns/Tail Attacks). The Highlanders still only get to use 2HD worth of weapons, the player just gets to pick what they're using during the Melee Phase.

I thought you and Matt said that equipment doesn't replace the standard equipment it just adds on. The example used was Chameleons and that they could swap between crossbow, daggers, pistols, whatever, every turn depending on what they were up against. Unless that's a special unit rule like Highlanders it just seems like overkill.

Not sure what you mean by specialised stat lines with a wider variety of equipment? We're not going to be adding more weapons to things, most of the boxes are bit heavy as is.

Basically I mean units can take a wide variety of equipment but their stats are the guide to how you use them. So have armouries for each faction or one huge armory or both and give the players the ability to kit out their troops themselves. That should add a wide variety of tactics and army combos as well as encouraging competitive play. I certainly wouldn't add any more to your kits, they are very generous as is. I think selling armory kits for conversion would be a solid solution and you could even lower the cost of your current kits by reducing them to standard weaponry only.

300 Resources would be 60 to 30 Troop Models, so alittle larger then just 4 small squads. More akin to a game of Warhammer 40k (Army Level) then say Warmachine (Skirmish+)

Yeh I made some maths errors there. I should have designated 100 to 200r and 50 to 100r instead of 50 to 150r. The point still stands though.

The current siege weapons can easily take out 5 models already.. 4 DE, Ignores Body Armor against each model under the template will wipe out pretty much any 5 FD model, and will seriously damage most 10 FD models/Heroes/Exemplars.

I think you are seriously over estimating the value of the Experts, everyone of them can be taken out by 2 Conscripts/Ashigaru/Fusiliers in a single activation. They've got some great special rules, sure, but they are still mortal (no Roland jokes). They are not meant to be Squad Leaders, Robyn Milne and The Agent are more along those roles for Axony. The Experts are more along the line of a Unique Elite Unit.. and like a unit, they're fairly cheap and easily wiped out.

Yes, you don't lose Equipment.. And yes the Chameleons can have 4 weapons, but they are still only going to be able to use 2 of them in a single phase.. and you still have to choose which 2 you feel is the best option for what you're doing. Neither the Chameleons nor the Highlanders have a special rule that dictates how their equipment works.

 miskatonicalum wrote:
As a note, in 2.0 you no longer make additional deviations based on number of distance dice rolled. Now you only make deviations for the Rocks or Unique Ammo that call for it, before rolling to attack.

I am not sure that is the right direction to take. As seen with Wehrkind graph, strangely, some range are harder to it because of the dice probability. Since deviation is already huge on the trebuchets, my proposition would be to simply choose a target, and do the multiple deviations from there (something like a deviation dice per 10 to 20"). Deviating up to 9 inch per roll is already imprecise enough, but this would get rid of the "optimal ranges" brought by the actual method.

Looking at their historical use, after some shots, trebuchets were adjusted and hitting pretty precisely. You could add a rule that further shots after the first, if targeting the exact same spot (most probably a fortification, and that rule could only work for those), you can remove a deviation dice.

On the cannon side, I simply find the range too short. Most of the hand held weapons can outshoot it. That doesn't seem right to me. Maybe doing something like I proposed with the Trebuchet would work: nominate a point within range, and for each full X", roll a die to add and determine the impact point.

Are you suggesting fixed ranges for the Siege Weapons, or something else?

 Catyrpelius wrote:

 Cyporiean wrote:
The Bretonnian Trebuchet should be the right size, RiTides has a source for some plastic ones as well.

Cannons are dime a dozen in any historical range.

Balista/Scorpions are also prevalent in Historical Ranges, but we'll have one in the tail end of the year.

The things that RiTides has are more along the lines of a catapult but they look awsome and they actually work.

Yeah, they're fun

 Cyporiean wrote:
Are you suggesting fixed ranges for the Siege Weapons, or something else?

Something else. My suggestion was to simply choose a target WITHIN range, not a fixed range. You check for range after choosing your target, and if it is out of range, the shot could either be lost, or made at min/max range. Both could work.

Here is a tentative wording:

Trebuchet
Range: 10-60"
Choose a point anywhere on the table. If the point is out of range, the shot is lost.
For each 15", or part of it, make a deviation roll from the target point.
Once the final position is determined, center the large template on it and proceed with your attack roll.

So for example, I could choose a target that ends up being at 35" from my trebuchet. That's two full 15", and 5" more. So you would make 3 deviation roll from the target.

Well, the issue with that is that Brushfire allows measuring anything you want during your activation.. so Guess Range doesn't really work.

Another idea: You could add a further deviation dice for target out of line of sight.

One of the main points in changing the Siege Engine Deviation was to remove the extra deviations...

 Cyporiean wrote:
Well, the issue with that is that Brushfire allows measuring anything you want during your activation.. so Guess Range doesn't really work.

I was not suggesting a guess range, except for the part about knowing min/max range. Just remove that part of my explanation then, my bad.

I would pick a target within range (that you can check), and deviate from that, based on distance.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Alfndrate wrote:
One of the main points in changing the Siege Engine Deviation was to remove the extra deviations...

I understand that. But doing so, you now have a trebuchet that shoot better in "steps". Why would being 34" away being safer than 29 or 39? (Made up distances, look back at Wehrkind graph if you want precise numbers.)

Also, with my suggested method, you don't have a random distance, then deviations. So you only have one random part, which amount to about the same in the hand, but with a better "spread zone".

I've been giving this plenty of thought over the course of the day. The Siege Weapon effectiveness vs. Exemplar effectiveness needs to be tested on the tabletop. Our opinions on the matter will only carry us so far before we MUST test it on the table. No one likes Mathhammer, well Alf's not a huge fan of Theoryfire =Analytica Rodentia=. In my experiences, my Badger in the Iron Claws has been just as effective as my Chugokan Trebuchet, both of them are roughly the same cost. I'll have to see how this changes in 2nd ed, but if I keep going, I'll simply be theoryfiring, which is worse than dry firing...

My other thought is, why does it matter if the Exemplar has a name or not? They're a sergeant of a squad. They attach themselves and give a buff and bypass the 10 man activation limit. Is it because they're unique? Okay, So the "Badger in the Iron Claws" or Arctos Nevsky becomes, "Veteran-At-Claw" and "Berserker Warlord". They could still be unique pieces of the army. I guess I don't understand that. I can see the want to customize your exemplars, but if we did that, then they'd be no different than Heroes, except that you pay for them...

These are supposed to the "exemplary" soldiers. They're the names on the battlefield that people know and fear. Now "Rat Raider 12"...

I know that you said that you thought Non-Unique Exemplars are a step in the right direction on Exemplars, except that they existed in 1st edition as well, and they don't have upgrades, none of them do by design...

I realize I'm getting a little ranty here, but I feel like there are mountains being made out of Vespuccian molehills here... You build your forces the way you wish to, we simply give you the tools....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tonio wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:
One of the main points in changing the Siege Engine Deviation was to remove the extra deviations...

I understand that. But doing so, you now have a trebuchet that shoot better in "steps". Why would being 34" away being safer than 29 or 39? (Made up distances, look back at Wehrkind graph if you want precise numbers.)

Also, with my suggested method, you don't have a random distance, then deviations. So you only have one random part, which amount to about the same in the hand, but with a better "spread zone".

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...

I think we'll have to agree to disagree, Cyp.

I'll be interested to see how 2nd takes shape.

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