Jump to content

Grand-Stone

Member
  • Content Count

    786
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Grand-Stone last won the day on September 3

Grand-Stone had the most liked content!

About Grand-Stone

  • Rank
    Sircan

Recent Profile Visitors

1,181 profile views
  1. Grand-Stone

    The Beta Lives!

    If you don't allow for easy cheap online stats-update, we will be stuck with stupid stats for a very long time. So, I strongly recommend something which is easily printable by simple printers.
  2. Grand-Stone

    The Beta Lives!

    And doing adjustments to stats is super important. I do also see the benefit of stat-cards. It makes it easy to track the stats you want. Printable statscards may be a way to go. But if so, please print the version on the stats them self. Even better, make an army builder which creates a pdf with only the stats you need on it.
  3. Grand-Stone

    Beta response -abstraction and streamlining versus fun

    I think that stackable bonuses are very much part of the fun. Small fliers & flying obscured, get 6+ to hit. Makes them really well protected, unless the enemy has some hunter ability. Makes the hunter ability really helpful. Or other ways to get the to-hit number up. Also, it seems like fix-channels is gone. I don't enjoy that.
  4. Grand-Stone

    The Beta Lives!

    One big disadvantage with statscards sold with the model is updating stats... A simple pdf, and you can make revision, uploaded on your website and everyone is happy. With statscards it become much more painful...
  5. Grand-Stone

    The Beta Lives!

    In sort, to many of the old abilties are gone and makes it hard to describe the units with the current rules.
  6. Grand-Stone

    The Beta Lives!

    For me the major thing is lack of reduction of firepower with damage and the new boarding rules. These leads too many of the MARS and special effects of units being difficult to model. Say the EoBS, which had fire on almost all guns and rocktes, or the Prussians which kills AP as you go. Flamethrower in 2.5 finally was streamlined and fun. But anything that kills AP is gone cuz its a constant number. One of the neat tactics was to weaken something then board it. In 2.0 and 2.5, letting the BB take a few point of damage reduced AA, which helped a lot when boarding. Add fire to kill a few AP,... Now it's far more difficult to weaken a unit then board. Now boarding is just another weapon. I would like to see boarding be different. That boarding is high rish high reward situation. Where you could kill an enemy vessel by taking out all its boarding defence. Further, the new way of tackling to-hit number. Since it isn't a number anymore, it is impossible to have two effects stack! For example, small and submerged both had -1 to be hit. Thus it adds up to -2 which made the enemy only hit on exploding 6'es. If you had a hunter ability, it negated one of them. The ability to stack effect is gone, simply by removing to hit as numbers. Tiny fliers: I sort of like parts of it. But, also misslike other parts. The parts I misslike is that there is no difference between torpedo bombers, divebombers or fighters. Earlier EoBS (my main faction) had better torpedo bombers, and slightly improved fighters. Now that these differences are also difficult to handle. I somewhat like the rules for SAS, but I also hate that there is no 'fight to rule the skies'. In 2.5 whoever had the most carriers dominated the skies, and removed all enemy planes. Now you could launch new squadrons regardless of the total looses you have. Carriers should have a max capacity. For example they could have 10 launch point and 20 capacity. Once they have lost more than 10, they start reducing the number you could launch. What I like however, is that SAS helps in boarding, both in attack and defence. In 2.5 atleast, it helped in defence, but not in ofensive. I like that. But that does not compensate for the new boarding rules.
  7. Grand-Stone

    The Beta Lives!

    This is a weak shadow of the game I love. Yes I get it, you want to reduce calculations, but this is simply far to much...
  8. Grand-Stone

    Carriers and TFTs in 3rd Edition

    It depends also on how you handle these actions. If landing increases your capacity instantly, you could use those points to launch a new wing the same turn. And if you could active the wing the same turn you launch them, it makes sense to land TFT round 3. I fear that it will be to easy to simply launch, activate a wing and conclude it's missions. Then there are limited ways to make drain enemy capacity.
  9. Grand-Stone

    Carriers and TFTs in 3rd Edition

    I think that a TFT should need to be within 4'' of a carrier to land. Just because it makes it easier to counter dive-bombers with fighters that way. And the thing I want to reintroduce though, is that KILLED TFT do NOT return to the carrier, and thus cannot be used for missions later.
  10. Grand-Stone

    Carriers and TFTs in 3rd Edition

    Note, that in 1.1 they landed one turn, and launched the next. There is nothing stopping you from launching them the same turn they land. I think the rules scetched make tons of sense, makes things very easy and flexible. Now you only need two rules, *land* and *launch*. Launch: launch one wing per launch point use, and it cost 1 capacity point per wing launched. Then there are several options on how they are launched, especially how they are activated launch and how far from the carrier they are. This depends on the carrier. Landing simply increase capacity points you have, up to the maxium of starting capacity. There are also several options on how landing can be done... 1) By activating a wing, OR by activating a carrier within n'' of a wing. 2) How many capacity points do a carrier recover when a wing lands. Several options... Could depend on which type of carrier... -Recover capacity points up to the original size of the wing -Revoer capactiy points up to the number of surviving TST in a wing -Recover capacity points up to the number of surviving TST plus half of the number of lost. (1 surving out of 5 would then lead to increase in capacity by 3) Lets take an example. 6 launch points, 9 capacity points, and this carrier has a Mar which allows any wing launched to be activated in the same action as the carrier. 1 turn. You decide to launch two sets of 3. (instead of 1x5). You then have spent 6 capacity points and have 3 left. You decide to wait to launch your last 3 before the right opportunity... Later turn: one TST of one wing you send out manage to land on the carrier, which increases (going with 3 landing option) increases capacity by 2, increasing it from 3 to 5. Then, same turn, you launch a wing of 5, activate it and cursh your enemy with amazing dive bombers.
  11. Grand-Stone

    Carriers and TFTs in 3rd Edition

    Seems like you have taken inspirations from the discussion in this thread. Which I like a lot. By the way, having a wing of TFT land increase capacity, is an elegant way of handling things. Then they can use that extra points to launch whatever they want. No need to have 'rearm, retask' actions any more.
  12. Grand-Stone

    Carriers and TFTs in 3rd Edition

    Interesting idea, but probably too radical. Smalls first then?
  13. Grand-Stone

    Carriers and TFTs in 3rd Edition

    Also possible Would solve the activation spam. Or alternatively, they cannot activate before their own phase at the end of all other movements. The only exception is if a carrier have a MAR to activate them earlier as part of the carrier movement. That would link SAS to the carrier. However, my 5 cents, carriers should be able to launch a limited amount of wings independently of how many wings are destroyed. If you link respawn with destruction, you would benefit from getting your sas killed, which creates lots of really stupid scenarios. Especially in carrier versus carrier fleets.
  14. Grand-Stone

    Carriers and TFTs in 3rd Edition

    Maybe each carrier could active up to 'N' wings this way, where N could be 1, 2 or even 3.
  15. Grand-Stone

    Carriers and TFTs in 3rd Edition

    I agree 100% Having them different is one key. The other is to link them more to the carrier. Having them launch will make tiny fliers feel more part of the carrier. With 6 launch points you could launch 1x5 or 2x3. What whould you choose
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.