Switch Theme:

Kill Team Tweaks  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in ca
Poisonous Kroot Headhunter





Overall, I think that the new Kill Team is pretty well balanced and a lot of fun. That being said, it's a new system and could certainly use a few tweaks here and there. So I wanted to make this and see what kind of general mechanics tweaks people would like to see. Please note that this is not meant for specific faction balance like "Custodes are too OP, please buff Hvy Intercessors, or why can't we use 2 units of Cultists" it's for general gameplay tweaks and missions. Here are mine:

1. Close Combat: They got close, they really did, but I don't think it's quite there yet. What I thought would amount to strategic duels of dice play instead 9 times out of 10 turn into either a 1 shot kill, or a 2 shot kill and you take a little damage. What I think would work a lot better, is if you were allowed a single armor save in close combat. Then on the attack you'd have to consider going for that 1 or 2 shot kill vs playing it more safe and parrying. I think that would make it much more strategic and interesting without changing the system very much.

2. Mission Blanace: Evac Inbound. This is such a strange one because I think that the mission Sabotours, which has a very similar design, is actually very well balanced by comparison. For those who don't know, Evac inbound from the Octarius box has one player set up half their fireteam in a central base while the other half comes in on either turn 2 or 3. The attacker deploys along any of the table edges. There are three major issues with this mission.
1) Scoring. So in this mission, the defender gets up to 1 VP for each model still alive in the base at the end of the turn, to a max of 3, whereas the attacker gains 3 VP for each of the original defenders slain, in addition at the end of the game, they get an extra 1VP for every injured defender or defender not within their drop zone. So, this is already giving a fairly large advantage to the attacker, if it's a horde army defending, they can easily score multiple times, and if not, then even removing a single model a turn will still put the attacker well ahead. I would either remove the cap of 3VP a turn to help horde armies, or decrease the attackers VP earned per kill to 2. (Possibly both given how lopsided the matches in the mode have been where all others have been pretty even.)
2) Not balanced for "Marine" units. 3 APL on the attacker side is a huge advantage here, this allows them to get up into the terrain turn 1, even if they cant melee, they are still shooting while negating the cover and will be well into their targets next turn. This would normally be a risky move, but since the defender only has half their force, it's not easy to punish the attacker for this. To fix this, I would just rotate the board. Right now the rectangular shape matches the board so each edge is more-less the same distance to the base. If the base was rotated to have it's short sides match the boards long sides, the attacker could set up on the boards 2 short edges. This would still make the defender feel surrounded, but prevent the attackers from getting on top turn 1.
3) Reserves. The defender has reinforcements arrive on a 4+ turn 2, but the attacker can take a 1EP item to increase a unit's roll required to a 5+. This makes it very easy for the attacker to delay key units until the game is already half over. I would change this to units arriving on a 3+ with the attacker having the option to change them to a 4+.

3. Not quite enough equipment. I really like the idea of equipment being a way to specialize your fireteam rather than taking points for things on each model, it makes things a lot more flexible and adjustable on the fly. However, many of the factions seems pretty restricted which kind of defeats the purpose. I think that this should be expanded upon for every factions, not drastically, but a few more options each so that there is a bit more customizability to each faction without actually changing much of anything.

So what do you all think? I'm sure there are other little nitpicks I could make, but that's all off the top of my head.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/27 18:26:38


17210 4965 3235 5350 2936 2273 1176 2675
1614 1342 1010 2000 960 1330 1040  
   
Made in us
Buttons Should Be Brass, Not Gold!






The Spec Ops Kill Teams (Vet Guard, Kommandos, Hunter Clade) seem to have a decent amount of equipment. I think once every faction gets their Spec Ops Teams, the equipment lists will become more diverse than what one can take in Compendium based teams.

Dunno what to think about that "one save allowed" for melee. None of the melee weapons have AP, so any operative with a 3+ save or better would be much harder to wound than other models. It's not a good fit IMO. I think the current melee system is good enough, I mean real CC is messy and chaotic, how much "choice" do you have IRL? Things happen very fast. I think the current system simulates this well enough.

Cant comment on the "Evac Inbound" mission as I haven't played it yet. What I will say is that I'm personally not a fan of the 22" x 30" board size, I feel it's too small, but haven't played enough games yet to know of a more appropriate size for a board..

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/09/27 20:53:19


 
   
Made in ca
Poisonous Kroot Headhunter





Yeah, that's a fair point, and I really hope that trend continues, a la Crusade style with lots of custom options for the new teams.

True, however you can flip it the other way as well, even in a chaotic melee, how much damage is a bayonet going to do to someone in ceramite armour? Besides, even if an attacks slips past someones guard, a quick swist could deflect a lethal blow off a pauldron or something. That's why I think only a single save is a good idea, it brings some randomness to it rather than just looking at the rolls and instantly knowing what the optimal choice is, but still allows some damage to be basically guaranteed.

I think the board size is pretty good for the most part, at least for the way it is currently designed. That being said, I'm really itching to play bigger Kill Team games on larger tables once I've got a few more games under my belt and have a better feel how various armies handle their playstyles.

17210 4965 3235 5350 2936 2273 1176 2675
1614 1342 1010 2000 960 1330 1040  
   
Made in au
Frenzied Berserker Terminator






On melee, I think they actually came really close to nailing it. I really like the risky nature of it, where you have to seriously weigh up the benefits of charging (extra movement, take objective, stop enemy from shooting, etc.) against the risks of taking damage. The only tweaks I would make are:
- A critical Parry can be used to block two normal hits.
- A player can spend two normal hits to block one critical hit. This would be an exception to the normal "choose one dice" process.

This retains the risky nature of charging into melee, while allowing a skilful operative (i.e. one with lots of attacks and/or increased chances of rolling crits) to probably come out unscathed vs less skilled enemies. A combat between two similarly-skilled operatives will still be just as dangerous as it is now.
   
Made in ca
Poisonous Kroot Headhunter





 Cheex wrote:
On melee, I think they actually came really close to nailing it. I really like the risky nature of it, where you have to seriously weigh up the benefits of charging (extra movement, take objective, stop enemy from shooting, etc.) against the risks of taking damage. The only tweaks I would make are:
- A critical Parry can be used to block two normal hits.
- A player can spend two normal hits to block one critical hit. This would be an exception to the normal "choose one dice" process.

This retains the risky nature of charging into melee, while allowing a skilful operative (i.e. one with lots of attacks and/or increased chances of rolling crits) to probably come out unscathed vs less skilled enemies. A combat between two similarly-skilled operatives will still be just as dangerous as it is now.


Hmm, yeah, that would be nice, but there is still what is basically the rule of instant death no matter what which I don't like. If a model has only a couple wounds left, they are basically guaranteed to die instantly and without a fight. I just wish the defender could interact more. Maybe, the defender could "strike" first, but only if they choose to parry?

17210 4965 3235 5350 2936 2273 1176 2675
1614 1342 1010 2000 960 1330 1040  
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 Tawnis wrote:
 Cheex wrote:
On melee, I think they actually came really close to nailing it. I really like the risky nature of it, where you have to seriously weigh up the benefits of charging (extra movement, take objective, stop enemy from shooting, etc.) against the risks of taking damage. The only tweaks I would make are:
- A critical Parry can be used to block two normal hits.
- A player can spend two normal hits to block one critical hit. This would be an exception to the normal "choose one dice" process.

This retains the risky nature of charging into melee, while allowing a skilful operative (i.e. one with lots of attacks and/or increased chances of rolling crits) to probably come out unscathed vs less skilled enemies. A combat between two similarly-skilled operatives will still be just as dangerous as it is now.


Hmm, yeah, that would be nice, but there is still what is basically the rule of instant death no matter what which I don't like. If a model has only a couple wounds left, they are basically guaranteed to die instantly and without a fight. I just wish the defender could interact more. Maybe, the defender could "strike" first, but only if they choose to parry?


Personally I think the defender should, before the dice are rolled, choose to strike or parry.

Strike = current system but the defender can only choose Strike
Parry = defenders dice act just like save dice.

"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in ca
Poisonous Kroot Headhunter





 the_scotsman wrote:


Personally I think the defender should, before the dice are rolled, choose to strike or parry.

Strike = current system but the defender can only choose Strike
Parry = defenders dice act just like save dice.


If the game were longer, I think this would be a great idea to reflect the ebb and flow of a back and forth duel; however I think it mitigates too much damage for the 4 turn fast paced Kill Team.

17210 4965 3235 5350 2936 2273 1176 2675
1614 1342 1010 2000 960 1330 1040  
   
Made in us
Buttons Should Be Brass, Not Gold!






I don't personally have a problem with a low wounds remaining model being autokilled by a model who initiates a fight. Usually the model is considered wounded by this stage anyway, so I picture it in my mind that the model is barely standing and the attacker just makes short work of them.

What might be interesting is that if both models go into the fight with only a few wounds remaining.. some interesting twist could be re-introduced to that. Something like a special rule where the first damage dealt will be determined by a roll off or something, in the event where either model would be incapacitated by a single regular success roll from either combatant. Something like that would feel quite cinematic.
   
Made in au
Frenzied Berserker Terminator






 Tawnis wrote:

Hmm, yeah, that would be nice, but there is still what is basically the rule of instant death no matter what which I don't like. If a model has only a couple wounds left, they are basically guaranteed to die instantly and without a fight. I just wish the defender could interact more. Maybe, the defender could "strike" first, but only if they choose to parry?

I don't think this is a problem that needs to be solved.

If a model has so few wounds that they can be one-shot by a single melee hit, then they are basically walking dead. They are beaten, battered, bruised and bleeding, and are probably barely standing. It's not so unbelievable that such an operative - even a Space Marine or Custodian - might have huge rents in their armour that a surprise attacker could take advantage of.

From a mechanical perspective, melee is already risky - a fight between two operatives of similar ability who have not taken wounds will result in one winning and the other being severely injured. Even a combat between one powerful melee fighter and one mediocre one will result in the stronger operative taking at least a few wounds. Contrast that with shooting, where the only risk of taking damage is if there is an enemy operative nearby who is yet to activate; fighting, on the other hand, always gives the target a chance to hit back.

The only way for a melee operative to get a "safe" combat is to charge an enemy that is already wounded - and even then there is always the chance that you roll badly and don't get any hits against them. I don't see that as a problem at all.
   
Made in fi
Longtime Dakkanaut






I don't think the melee is a problem either. The attacker gaining the advantage of the first, potentially deadly, hit is a desirable feature with all the manoeuvering involved in getting there in the first place. To have the target in such a wounded condition requires more effort than just shooting them and can still fail horribly if you flub your rolls and get clubbed in the face for it.

#ConvertEverything blog with loyalist Death Guard in true and Epic scales. Also Titans and killer robots! C&C welcome.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/717557.page

Do you like narrative gaming? Ongoing Imp vs. PDF rebellion campaign reports here:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/786958.page

 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 tauist wrote:
I don't personally have a problem with a low wounds remaining model being autokilled by a model who initiates a fight. Usually the model is considered wounded by this stage anyway, so I picture it in my mind that the model is barely standing and the attacker just makes short work of them.

What might be interesting is that if both models go into the fight with only a few wounds remaining.. some interesting twist could be re-introduced to that. Something like a special rule where the first damage dealt will be determined by a roll off or something, in the event where either model would be incapacitated by a single regular success roll from either combatant. Something like that would feel quite cinematic.


It also encourages more high-risk play from what would otherwise be low-risk armies, which I think is another plus.

"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





The Attacker is the one spending his APL to make an offensive move. He should have the advantage.

"'players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models they can use."

This is an actual rule in the actual rulebook. Quit whining about how you can imagine someone's army touching you in a bad place and play by the actual rules.


Freelance Ontologist

When people ask, "What's the point in understanding everything?" they've just disqualified themselves from using questions and should disappear in a puff of paradox. But they don't understand and just continue existing, which are also their only two strategies for life. 
   
Made in gb
Been Around the Block




Combat does seem like almost certain death sometimes.

If using a non-combat specialist the best it seems you can do is kill the opponent but likely lose enough become injured. Or if you roll poorly either parry and survive on 1-2 wounds, or die and inflict some wounds, hopefully leaving the opponent injured enough to be finished off.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut



London

 Tawnis wrote:

1. Close Combat: They got close, they really did, but I don't think it's quite there yet. What I thought would amount to strategic duels of dice play instead 9 times out of 10 turn into either a 1 shot kill, or a 2 shot kill and you take a little damage. What I think would work a lot better, is if you were allowed a single armor save in close combat. Then on the attack you'd have to consider going for that 1 or 2 shot kill vs playing it more safe and parrying. I think that would make it much more strategic and interesting without changing the system very much.


It feels like the system was designed for opposed dice pools (highest to highest, or some other way of matching dice to dice), but didn't work out. I can see why, stuff like a skilled lots of dice defender might become untouchable to a less skilled person charging in. The idea of using dice one at a time feels like a patch on that.

I think any solution has to have the ability for the attacker to do something with a suicidal charge (at least most of the time) but also give a lucky defender a way of avoiding being one shot'ed.

My brainstormed solution would be to give an edge to a very skilled or lucky fighter. Sequence would become.

Roll dice pools, rerolling as allowed, defender first.
Remove crits from each pool on a 1-1 basis.
The Defender may now discard a remaining crit to act first.
Otherwise the attacker uses the first dice as normal.

So Astartes charges Genestealer
Marine - 6,6, 5, 3
Stealer - 6,6,6,6,1
Here after step 2 the dice pools are
5, 3
6, 6, 1
The stealer now has the option to discard a crit and go first with its remaining hit, or take a hit, parry or attack back, etc.
   
 
Forum Index » Other 40K/30K Universe Games
Go to: