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.

 plastictrees wrote:
Would anyone be interested in producing some generic 'taste of the faction' armies for each force?
I'd like to get some Alpha games in but find the army list selection process completely paralyzing.
I play NuCoal and have pretty much all their gears (No Espions, Lanciers or Hussar) a couple of Fusiliers, APCs and infantry.

Really? I found it very straight forward...

Here is a simple exemple: says you got 2 stock Chasseurs, 1 Grenadier Chasseur and 1 Chasseur MK2.

All the above are part of the GP Unit Availability, and each model have one action each. So, this give you a Primary unit of 4 models, the minimum allowed, since you need to have 4 to 6 actions total to get one unit/squad, whatever you want.

Then, let say you have only 2 Chevaliers available, you could attach both of them to your GP squad, thus becoming the Regimental Support Choice for this unit, you can't have more than half the action of your primary Unit. After this, you choose who gonna be the Combat group leader, only model from the primary unit can be a CGL. You could also add generic upgrade to this group.
So this is your first combat group.

And start again for next combat group until you spent all your TV total.

Thanks!

It's not the mechanics of it, more the endless second guessing. I'm guilty of it in most games that I don't get to play very often, the list building side of things gets wildly exagerrated to the point of never letting me be satisified.

Ultimately I'm more concerned about building and painting a bunch of Xs with Y weapon and then realising that I should have given them all Z weapon.

I should start a catalogue of gaming disorders.

 warboss wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

 Vertrucio wrote:
Sure, DP9 is a bit odd for announcing this while releasing books that are going to be invalidated. But no one makes a game without being able to get specific feedback.

Why not? They have up until now, you know.

That being a good idea, on the other hand...

As long as they tell customers about the new edition prior to selling the soon to be outdated file, I think it is a good idea.

Ah, no. Releasing the files is a good idea. I was talking about the specific feedback there.

So, any newbloods going to give us some comments on the Alpha? Nemo... Bueller.... crickets?

-Brandon F.

I think a lot of people may be waiting for the next revision, as the current Alpha is scattered over the main documents and one or more errata/FAQ sources.

Indeed. I've been holding off on making more comments in general after going through most of the documents for typos and a few glaring discrepancies. I'm waiting for the new version as well as hopefully being able to get in a test game sometime soon.

This is not really a comment about the Alpha per se, as the unit stats are right now the least important, but... I think I am a bit taken aback with the current stats of the Visigoth MBT.

Not with how it performs, actually (haven't tested it yet), but with how its role has changed so drastically, for no reason apparent. Back in the day, it was a typical southern war machine: which is to mean, multirole, and it was designed as a MBT and close fire support unit.

Now, it has lost each and every IF capabilities whatsoever, it also has lost its secondary role completely due to that, and is now effectively exactly the same as the Aller (yes, different loadout. Doesn't matter: they play the same).

Funnily enough, the only MBT with IF capabilities left is the Voltigeur.

Now that I take a look, the Hun is also in the same position... and both are saddled with the really, really underperforming current LLCs (and none of those LLCs have AA, which is funny, taking into account that those lasers are specifically mounted for air defense purposes xD).

 Albertorius wrote:


Now, it has lost each and every IF capabilities whatsoever, it also has lost its secondary role completely due to that, and is now effectively exactly the same as the Aller (yes, different loadout. Doesn't matter: they play the same).

Funnily enough, the only MBT with IF capabilities left is the Voltigeur.

Now that I take a look, the Hun is also in the same position... and both are saddled with the really, really underperforming current LLCs (and none of those LLCs have AA, which is funny, taking into account that those lasers are specifically mounted for air defense purposes xD).

I really like this change, tank should be more direct assault platform than IF one. Also, something that always bugged me in Blitz is how Field Gun are the best indirect fire weapon (no ACC penalty for firing indirectly), it is even a better choice to shoot them indirectly (target defending at -1 from indirect fire) in front of a target than fire directly, which feel very absurd. I even had a situation in a game were a top speed going Volitgeur shooted its twin field gun indirectly at a MHT-72 that was standing in front of him ( you hope to roll a 6, since you keep the unmodified roll, while the target defend at -1) So, tank should move forward and fire at target in sight. For real indirect support, use Ostrogoth, Water Dragon, Spitting Cobra (Arty, Support, base one).

About laser, I like them now, firing laser was also the second best weapon o a tank to shoot at Gear, why instead you should be using your coaxial autocannon, laser will be effective at shooting aircraft when will get there.

For the Hun, look closely, its MRP got the IF trait, so it can be used as an indirect fire platform.

riker2800 wrote:
I really like this change, tank should be more direct assault platform than IF one.

Even when the fluff of the unit has been the other way around like, forever? Even when the change make the southern and northern tanks basically interchangeable when before each one played very differently at the table? Even when, for some reason, the Voltigeur still has IF capabilities?

Also, something that always bugged me in Blitz is how Field Gun are the best indirect fire weapon (no ACC penalty for firing indirectly), it is even a better choice to shoot them indirectly (target defending at -1 from indirect fire) in front of a target than fire directly, which feel very absurd. I even had a situation in a game were a top speed going Volitgeur shooted its twin field gun indirectly at a MHT-72 that was standing in front of him ( you hope to roll a 6, since you keep the unmodified roll, while the target defend at -1)

That's an artifact of Blitz, I'm afraid. Nothing to do with the unit or the weapon. Back in the day the HFG was a not-that-good IF weapon because it lacked area.

So, tank should move forward and fire at target in sight. For real indirect support, use Ostrogoth, Water Dragon, Spitting Cobra (Arty, Support, base one).

That's your position, and as such is an opinion, not a statement of fact. Having weapons that behaved differently made for very different playstyles, which helped to see the factions as, well, different. That is dead and killed now.

As for the others... the Ostrogoth is a long-range, batallion level support unit, the Water Dragon is a water terrain support unti for gear regiments, and the Spits are regular close-range support for Gear regiments. The Visigoths had their own close-range support up until now, which made them play differently.

...in short: you think that way, I disagree.

About laser, I like them now, firing laser was also the second best weapon o a tank to shoot at Gear, why instead you should be using your coaxial autocannon, laser will be effective at shooting aircraft when will get there.

Any weapon potent and precise enough to shoot down fighter crafts at range, and capable of traverse enough to shoot at ground targets, will be potent enough to destroy IFVs. That is a fact. And as before, you're prortraying your likes and dislikes as proven facts, without taking into account many things, like the fact that a tank with 3 actions can actually fire the three weapons effectively, or the fact that the LLC has always been depicted as "area and anti-aircraft defense"

For the Hun, look closely, its MRP got the IF trait, so it can be used as an indirect fire platform.

True, didn't see that.

 Albertorius wrote:

riker2800 wrote:
I really like this change, tank should be more direct assault platform than IF one.

Even when the fluff of the unit has been the other way around like, forever? Even when the change make the southern and northern tanks basically interchangeable when before each one played very differently at the table? Even when, for some reason, the Voltigeur still has IF capabilities?

Visigoth get something very interesting now: Blast 3 on its main gun, while the Aller is only able to one shot single target, so here is your difference, one having the possibility of area destruction, while the other getting precise one shot overkill.

And I see no problem the Voltigeur getting IF capability? NuCoal is not very well served in the IF department when compared to the main Polar factions...

Any weapon potent and precise enough to shoot down fighter crafts at range, and capable of traverse enough to shoot at ground targets, will be potent enough to destroy IFVs. That is a fact. And as before, you're prortraying your likes and dislikes as proven facts, without taking into account many things, like the fact that a tank with 3 actions can actually fire the three weapons effectively, or the fact that the LLC has always been depicted as "area and anti-aircraft defense"

Laser were more than "Potent" at killing Gear, they were a better tactical choice than firing heavy autocannon, better range, more damage and ACC bonus... They should be your last weapon when firing on a Gear.

As for the others... the Ostrogoth is a long-range, batallion level support unit, the Water Dragon is a water terrain support unti for gear regiments, and the Spits are regular close-range support for Gear regiments. The Visigoths had their own close-range support up until now, which made them play differently.

What this have to do with game play? Who care an Ostrogoth should be used only for battalion support? If you need indirect support unit, you put them in your army, that's it.

riker2800 wrote:
Visigoth get something very interesting now: Blast 3 on its main gun, while the Aller is only able to one shot single target, so here is your difference, one having the possibility of area destruction, while the other getting precise one shot overkill.

Ah, yes. It loses the AT trait and gets HE... yay. So you get a weapon that's so-so against tanks (where the Blast does jack gak), but one-shots overkills clusters of regular gears at MoS 0... yay. I foresee lots of them against gears, none against tanks.

And I see no problem the Voltigeur getting IF capability? NuCoal is not very well served in the IF department when compared to the main Polar factions...

The NuCoal has more than enough options: Chevalier, Chevalier Hammer, Chevalier Hellfire, Chevalier Javelin, Boa, Firestorm Boa, Lancier Dart, Espion Grenadier, Hussar Spear, Hussar Skyhammer, Fusilier Anvil, Voltigeur, Voltigeur Hammer... yeah, not well served.

...but you see problems with IF for the Visigoths? Please, choose one stance, and stay there.

Laser were more than "Potent" at killing Gear, they were a better tactical choice than firing heavy autocannon, better range, more damage and ACC bonus... They should be your last weapon when firing on a Gear.

Why? Because you say so? Well, that's certainly an opinion, but taking into account that LLCs are a weapon that gets used as an anti gear sniper, I'd prefer it to be good at killing gears, thank you very much.

What this have to do with game play? Who care an Ostrogoth should be used only for battalion support? If you need indirect support unit, you put them in your army, that's it.

What does it have to do that you don't want lasers to kill gears? Who care that you don't like it? If you need to kill gears, you use it, that's it.

Some people may want to play with armies that follow the fluff of the game. Those people should also be served.

riker2800 wrote:
Laser were more than "Potent" at killing Gear, they were a better tactical choice than firing heavy autocannon, better range, more damage and ACC bonus... They should be your last weapon when firing on a Gear.

I'm not sure where you're getting that. So you think they a focused beam of light that lasts only a second should be better used versus infantry scattered about an area as a squad... swinging the beam around like at a dance club to hit the squad members? None of the beam weapons are AI so that would severely limit them in that capacity. So you think that lasers should be used against the heaviest vehicles in the entire game then like heavy tanks? Without buffing the stats majorly and adding some armor pen traits they fail miserably at that as well. That leaves us with Gears which is where traditionally they rocked in Blitz but now also are mediocre at because of the 1/2 pen rule. I don't know about you but a whole class of weapons should be good at something and frankly keeping them good at killing gears is the best choice IMO.

 warboss wrote:

riker2800 wrote:
Laser were more than "Potent" at killing Gear, they were a better tactical choice than firing heavy autocannon, better range, more damage and ACC bonus... They should be your last weapon when firing on a Gear.

I'm not sure where you're getting that. So you think they a focused beam of light that lasts only a second should be better used versus infantry scattered about an area as a squad... swinging the beam around like at a dance club to hit the squad members? None of the beam weapons are AI so that would severely limit them in that capacity. So you think that lasers should be used against the heaviest vehicles in the entire game then like heavy tanks? Without buffing the stats majorly and adding some armor pen traits they fail miserably at that as well. That leaves us with Gears which is where traditionally they rocked in Blitz but now also are mediocre at because of the 1/2 pen rule. I don't know about you but a whole class of weapons should be good at something and frankly keeping them good at killing gears is the best choice IMO.

It doesn't even has AA, so... what's it for, then?

 Albertorius wrote:

It doesn't even has AA, so... what's it for, then?

True... didn't even think of that. I guess they didn't get much thought since Paxton doesn't use beam weapons much. ZING!

Another thing that I've realized when cross checking this:

If one of every two weapons in the current lists have different damage, range or special qualities than the ones in the weapons tables... why in sweet hell are you guys still using weapons tables? Those don't help, only confuse.

 Albertorius wrote:
Another thing that I've realized when cross checking this:

If one of every two weapons in the current lists have different damage, range or special qualities than the ones in the weapons tables... why in sweet hell are you guys still using weapons tables? Those don't help, only confuse.

I completely agree. One way, or the other. (Tables or weapons w/attributes.) Not both.

On the other hand, I'm completely cool with a solution somewhat like Flames of War where a specific list might get (at a cost, of course) a special rule like "This faction's special weapons get a minor bonus." as long as said rule is documented and easy to parse

 Balance wrote:
I completely agree. One way, or the other. (Tables or weapons w/attributes.) Not both.

On the other hand, I'm completely cool with a solution somewhat like Flames of War where a specific list might get (at a cost, of course) a special rule like "This faction's special weapons get a minor bonus." as long as said rule is documented and easy to parse

I would have no problem with that approach, or with a weapons list for every army, ala 40k. Something, anything, easy to parse, please. Or if every weapon is to be different, just name it differently (Riley M221, TA Model T, whatever) instead, and add it to each unit. Having weapons with the same name and different stats is very confusing.

Don't forget that the tweaks that armies get should be roughly equal in efficacy and not complete crap for some factions and ridiculously useful for another.

 Albertorius wrote:

Ah, yes. It loses the AT trait and gets HE... yay. So you get a weapon that's so-so against tanks (where the Blast does jack gak), but one-shots overkills clusters of regular gears at MoS 0... yay. I foresee lots of them against gears, none against tanks.

That part might not be very clear in the rules, a weapon always keep its inherent trait, here being AT, HE is an additional Ammo type, so you choose to fire either the AT or the HE, depending on your target.

...but you see problems with IF for the Visigoths? Please, choose one stance, and stay there.

I had problem mostly with how Field gun worked in IF. I'm not against the Visigoth getting a field gun but I prefer it stay as a direct fire monster. This is how I like tank!

Why? Because you say so? Well, that's certainly an opinion, but taking into account that LLCs are a weapon that gets used as an anti gear sniper, I'd prefer it to be good at killing gears, thank you very much.
What does it have to do that you don't want lasers to kill gears? Who care that you don't like it? If you need to kill gears, you use it, that's it.

Sorry, but a small turreted area defense laser shouldn't pack more fire power than a coaxial heavy auto cannon. However, the LLC PEN need to be increased to 6. So, can still plink Gear to death with it. Sniper Anti-Gear Laser Rifle are another thing, those are build for killing Gear.

Some people may want to play with armies that follow the fluff of the game. Those people should also be served.

Those are not the majority...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Albertorius wrote:

 warboss wrote:

riker2800 wrote:
Laser were more than "Potent" at killing Gear, they were a better tactical choice than firing heavy autocannon, better range, more damage and ACC bonus... They should be your last weapon when firing on a Gear.

I'm not sure where you're getting that. So you think they a focused beam of light that lasts only a second should be better used versus infantry scattered about an area as a squad... swinging the beam around like at a dance club to hit the squad members? None of the beam weapons are AI so that would severely limit them in that capacity. So you think that lasers should be used against the heaviest vehicles in the entire game then like heavy tanks? Without buffing the stats majorly and adding some armor pen traits they fail miserably at that as well. That leaves us with Gears which is where traditionally they rocked in Blitz but now also are mediocre at because of the 1/2 pen rule. I don't know about you but a whole class of weapons should be good at something and frankly keeping them good at killing gears is the best choice IMO.

It doesn't even has AA, so... what's it for, then?

This one seem more of an oversight, they should get AA.

riker2800 wrote:
That part might not be very clear in the rules, a weapon always keep its inherent trait, here being AT, HE is an additional Ammo type, so you choose to fire either the AT or the HE, depending on your target.

That would be better... still very problematic, if you want less things to keep track of. And with HE... VERY problematic. It doesn't really need to do much to overkill whole blocks of gears (as in, MoS 0=Hunter Dead). Better disperse!

I had problem mostly with how Field gun worked in IF. I'm not against the Visigoth getting a field gun but I prefer it stay as a direct fire monster. This is how I like tank!

I see... I don't agree, honestly. It kills part of the southern doctrine, losing the secondary roll of the unit.

Sorry, but a small turreted area defense laser shouldn't pack more fire power than a coaxial heavy auto cannon. However, the LLC PEN need to be increased to 6. So, can still plink Gear to death with it. Sniper Anti-Gear Laser Rifle are another thing, those are build for killing Gear.

Sorry, but I don't agree. That "small turreted area defense laser" is as big or bigger than most gear mounted weapons (specifically, a 15 , up to VHAC. A bigger barrel in a laser only reflect some kind of trauma.

And plinking gears to death is not what you should be doing with a gun mounted in a tank, nor with a LLC, seeing as is an anti-gear sniping weapon... that currently does not work. Those are, again, your preferences. I'd rather not see only your preferences imposed over me.

Those are not the majority...

So you say.

This one seem more of an oversight, they should get AA.

That would be nice. Won't amount to anything anyway, as when using it agains aerial units it will probably be shooting at suboptimal, and hence at half PEN, but...

Yeah, I'm in agreement with Albertorious. Losing AA seems like simple oversight? Stupid not to have it, considering that's the point of it, and it's not a giant gamechanger having it anyway. I can understand dropping the LLC to an equivalent SLC for the Hun, they did that in FiF, as the Hun was just too good for it's cost, and the HRF was rarely ever used. The Visigoth should get to keep it, or get its points adjusted.

It is odd to lose IF on the HFG, and keep it on the Voltigeur, though I'm not entirely opposed. The m1abrams can fire indirectly, so it would seem to reason that the HFG should be able to fire as such as well. Though at least with the current changes, the tank should be less likely to explode if shot at in the open by everything, so it could do direct fire more easily.


And finally, I totally agree with the charts, they need either stick to the L/M/H from the table, or just drop the L/M/H entirely and just append the Pen number to the weapon. In posts by Dave, it sounds like they used to do the latter and the LMH stuff is there to try to appease dissenters.

*EDIT: Or add VL and VH back to the table and stick to those 5, though honestly I'm fine with just doing things like AC5, LPL6 etc.

 Albertorius wrote:

That would be better... still very problematic, if you want less things to keep track of. And with HE... VERY problematic. It doesn't really need to do much to overkill whole blocks of gears (as in, MoS 0=Hunter Dead). Better disperse!

Tracking what? You only declare which Ammo you use before firing, there is no even Ammo shots to keep track of?? As for dead Hunter on MOS 0, only the primary target will be, others Gears in an area of 3" will take half damage, which gonna be 3 hits. You are lucky if you hit more than 2 Gears...

Sorry, but I don't agree. That "small turreted area defense laser" is as big or bigger than most gear mounted weapons (specifically, a 15 , up to VHAC. A bigger barrel in a laser only reflect some kind of trauma. And plinking gears to death is not what you should be doing with a gun mounted in a tank, nor with a LLC, seeing as is an anti-gear sniping weapon... that currently does not work. Those are, again, your preferences. I'd rather not see only your preferences imposed over me.

Yes, LLC need s small PEN boost, PEN 7 could be a sweet spot. Not higher than that.

That would be nice. Won't amount to anything anyway, as when using it agains aerial units it will probably be shooting at suboptimal, and hence at half PEN, but...

Why you think they will be shooting at suboptimal?

So I've got a sizable NuCoal army I want to get rid of, complete with Battlefoam Bag.

I don't know exactly what I have, but would be willing to take some photos if anyone is interested.

I know for certain I have:

2 Samson hover apcs
2 hussar walkers
6 armadillo beasts
6 barnaby and sandriders

And then a bunch of various gears, somewhere in the neighborhood of 30-40.

Again, willing to take some photos if anyone is genuinely interested. Lemme know!

riker2800 wrote:
Tracking what? You only declare which Ammo you use before firing, there is no even Ammo shots to keep track of?? As for dead Hunter on MOS 0, only the primary target will be, others Gears in an area of 3" will take half damage, which gonna be 3 hits. You are lucky if you hit more than 2 Gears...

Ah, you're right, although with 3'' of radius I don't see it as that difficult.
...and with the current Blast rules, there can be a lot of cover shenanigans.

Yes, LLC need s small PEN boost, PEN 7 could be a sweet spot. Not higher than that.

PEN 7 won't really do all that much, TBH, what with it being 7 only in the optimal range bracket and only if there's no cover whatsoever.

Also, taking into account the sizes involved, basically every LLC currently stated should be MLCs, not LLCs. There were basically no weapon like the current LLC before, but because of shared terminology, a lot of units have been stuck with one.

Why you think they will be shooting at suboptimal?

The description of aircrafts in page 15 seems to imply so. It would stand to reason, too, if optimal is only between 12 and 36''.

 Albertorius wrote:

riker2800 wrote:
Tracking what? You only declare which Ammo you use before firing, there is no even Ammo shots to keep track of?? As for dead Hunter on MOS 0, only the primary target will be, others Gears in an area of 3" will take half damage, which gonna be 3 hits. You are lucky if you hit more than 2 Gears...

Ah, you're right, although with 3'' of radius I don't see it as that difficult.
...and with the current Blast rules, there can be a lot of cover shenanigans.

Getting two targets inside the blast will not be that hard to pull off, but getting more than that will be fairly rare, unless you play against someone dumb.

PEN 7 won't really do all that much, TBH, what with it being 7 only in the optimal range bracket and only if there's no cover whatsoever.
Also, taking into account the sizes involved, basically every LLC currently stated should be MLCs, not LLCs. There were basically no weapon like the current LLC before, but because of shared terminology, a lot of units have been stuck with one.

A PEN 7 laser is quite potent, you still roll a base 4D6, you should be doing easily between 2 to 3 hits against trooper Gear, we don't want point defense turret to be death ray cannon!

The description of aircrafts in page 15 seems to imply so. It would stand to reason, too, if optimal is only between 12 and 36''.

They shouldn't, since you won't calculate altitude, see section 17.0 how the general framework for the rules will work. Aircraft will simply cross the battle board at some point where you can shoot at them, so with range of 12-36, you will fire at them easily in the optimal range bracket.

riker2800 wrote:
A PEN 7 laser is quite potent, you still roll a base 4D6, you should be doing easily between 2 to 3 hits against trooper Gear, we don't want point defense turret to be death ray cannon!

Just to be clear, average rolls between a 4+ GUN attacker with a beam and 4+ PIL defender results in 1 MOS without any further modifiers, not 2-3 which is a better guage than just naked hits.

MoS 1 + PEN 7 - AR 6 = 2 hits which should be an easy average. However, tank can easily brace themselves without to much fear, adding another dice to the attack roll!

Only if you assume there is no cover or other modifiers which tend to predominately favor the defender and more commonly don't require an action compared with attacker modifiers.

This is why you should use your tank gun then!

Also, laser will be mostly used when Gears are swarming you in the open, also, since it got the Fast Turret, its a weapon that can be used for reaction fire.

All tanks should get a choice of firing AT or HE shells with the main gun really.


Also I'm not sure I like infantry on 40mm bases. I kind of feel they should be able to conform their bases to the terrain.
Using the three hex bases will let them fit better in a tight spot between terrain by lining them up. Every nook and cranny should be available to them.