Jump to content
Karun

Interview of Spartan Neil at the Gencon

Recommended Posts

How strict are some of you with the no models touching (the model itself, not the base) part of proximity vectoring?

Very strict, because those are the rules. Otherwise, you're not actually playing Firestorm Armada; you're playing a local variant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I realize I’m in a bit of the minority here so far, but I like the rule about models not touching. It should mater that you have put yourself in a position that is unfavorable. It should mater that your opponent was able to outmaneuver you. If your opponent manages to force you into an unfortunate position that should be rewarded, just like it is in real combat. If you can just get the model out of the way you are taking a very important level of strategic thinking out of the game. The complexity and depth of the movement phase and its repercussion is one of the reasons I play this game. Sure there are times when it can be simplified, moving an entire squadron of smalls that are in no danger of striking terrain, adjusting the final position of a ship to a place clearly reachable after measuring to the first position, but if you are in a $#it storm with models everywhere and the game in the balance… do it right because it maters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our group tends to take the figure off the base if they would collide. It's the base that really matters anyway and someone like Dindrenzi shouldn't be penalized for having cool models anyway when the ships are in reality nowhere near colliding due to the stem being the actual spot the ship is in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The dindrenzi can add that to their list of woes :lol: sometimes our games end up where its just bases and all the models are removed due to being so close, so I think we will be more strict with the vectoring rules in future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Proximity Vectoring should always be your last resort.

 

From Pg 51

 

If a model has no other option than to end its Movement

with its Flight Stand on top of another Flight Stand or
touching a model (due to compulsory Movement)

 

So if you have any other legal move, even if you don't like where it puts the ship, you have to go there instead. I think I have only ever heard on one instance where this was necessary. Most of the time it sounds like there were other moves that could have been made, but the player decided to vector instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So since this conversation has got me seriously thinking about it, I understand you can't end you movement overlapping another base or touching another model, unless you had absolutely no other alternative (such as main drives offline) or a snarled cluster of ships in front of a slower model.

 

I get this. My group usually pops models off to facilitate faster play, but I can see how (as this thread has been very thought provoking) that may influence game balance. For example a large dreadnought-type model shouldn't be able to pop off it's stand, move it's flight stand into a barely large enough hole, and blast away at everything with all of its arcs. It should have to edge around said cluster even if that prevents some arcs from drawing LOS.

 

So my new big question: Does the "thou shalt not touch another model" apply only at the end of a model's primary movement, or during all of it's movement? Can you still fly "through" other ships and end movement on the other side of them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These rules only apply at the end of a model's movement for the final placement. From page 51:

A model cannot end its Movement with its Flight Stand on top of another model’s Flight Stand, or with any part of the model touching another model.

One thing the rules do not cover is what orientation the models should have on the flight stand. I have seen some people spin their models on their flight stands to technically bypass the above rules, and that seems wrong to me. I try to keep everything fixed forward and centered on the base's forward arc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing the rules do not cover is what orientation the models should have on the flight stand. I have seen some people spin their models on their flight stands to technically bypass the above rules, and that seems wrong to me. I try to keep everything fixed forward and centered on the base's forward arc.

I've seen that too, don't care for it as it can throw your perception of where a ship is potentially heading. Which is why we take models off-stand instead. A quick dry-erase mark on the base to indicate front arc is all we need.

I think what I really dislike most about this no-peg-removing rule is that it smacks of being forced into adhering to someone else's petty personal preference as law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We go somewhere in the middle ground for casual play. 

 

We'll remove models from the flight stands, but stand cannot under any circumstances overlap. 

 

We veiw the stands as the "area of influence" of the ships within which collision is too great a risk - thats the fluff reasoning.

 

The rule reason is that ships like the Apollo are much harder to maneuver than for example the Directorate battleship on the table top. The apollos turning circle - inclusive of the massive forward and rearward overhang of the model is bigger than some dreadnoughts.

 

We maintain strict rules about the flight stands though as without them it would be far too easy to plough the aforementioned Apollo in between 2 or more ships and do what apollos do best.

 

Further more, to ignore the rules completely, would completely negate an important aspect of the game - careful maneuvering. Without thinking about where your ships are going, and where they're going to be, the game is just a probability game and you're essentially playing numbewang with dice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For everyone else not from the UK, Numberwang is a comedy sketch from "That Mitchell and Webb Look"

Numberwang: A game show hosted by Robert Webb, where two contestants, Simon and Julie (Paterson Joseph and Olivia Colman) shout out numbers until "Numberwang" is declared by the host.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the great majority of cases, and in friendly games, you can pop models on and off stands as much as you like (though the "model spinning" tactic is completely illegal no matter what justification is used!) - Firestorm is meant to be fun, not an exercise in pedantry.

 

For more competitive environments and tournaments, however, the rule exists for a reason - and it was touched upon above - you should not be able to move in such a way that would "push" other models out of the way for advantage. So a dreadnought should not really attempt to get stuck into a melee by an asteroid belt and a planet and attempt to avoid entering the asteroid belt by making what would normally be an illegal move due to other ships' presence. If you chose to drive your Dredanought into such a situation, you should suffer the consequences!

 

Now obviously, as with most rules, this can potentially be abused, but the situations are relatively rare, and I still stand by the old adage of any gameplay - including tournament - of "don't be a jerk". Proximity vectoring is there to help you out in knife-fight situations that can't be avoided - but if they can be avoided, they should be!

 

 

Ah good answer. Now one good question because this actually came up with my praetorian - what if there are no actual legal moves for tournament style play. For example my praetorian has a 6 inch move with a 2 TL - meaning realistically he can only turn twice. During a tournament he actually had no space to legally move anywhere including any which direction turn! We rules it as it just stood there and immediately cut its engines to avoid a ram with another ship - but I wonder what you would have ruled it as?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah good answer. Now one good question because this actually came up with my praetorian - what if there are no actual legal moves for tournament style play. For example my praetorian has a 6 inch move with a 2 TL - meaning realistically he can only turn twice. During a tournament he actually had no space to legally move anywhere including any which direction turn! We rules it as it just stood there and immediately cut its engines to avoid a ram with another ship - but I wonder what you would have ruled it as?

 

I would have you figure out the course then place the model as close to the final position as possible.  Being able to simply stop where you were may have been a huge advantage.  The half move requirement is pretty important,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought this situation was exactly why the Proximity Vectoring rule was written:

If a model has no other option than to end its Movement with its Flight Stand on top of another Flight Stand or touching a model (due to compulsory Movement) the situation should be resolved using Proximity Vectoring.

Or is Proximity Vectoring only supposed to come into play "due to compulsory movement"?

One of my first games I ended up in a situation where I couldn't legally move my Praetorian, mostly due to the model size. It took us a long time to even figure that out, and then we had to figure out how to apply "a model making a Proximity Vector move should not gain any immediate advantage from the readjustment of its position."

In other words, it's can be very difficult to follow the "A model cannot end its Movement with its Flight Stand on top of another model’s Flight Stand, or with any part of the model touching another model." Most players seem to simply ignore this rule, one way or another.

When I first started playing, I thought you could simply remove the model, because "the thin supporting shaft of the Flight Stand, known as the Flight Peg being considered to represent the actual position of the model on the game board." When someone pointed out models were not allowed to touch, I realized it implied the size of the models themselves impacted gameplay, and thus removing them was not allowed.

These rules have the largest impact on large models. While the Dindrenzi Assault carrier is an awesome model, I don't think I'll ever want to play with it, because it's huge!. It wants to brawl with those Gunracks and Wings, but that fat ass will never fit through the door.

Even if the requirement that models cannot touch is removed, it doesn't address the true issue: The current rules are ambiguous and subjective. Game rules are ultimately procedures which tell you how to play the game. And as any engineer or service member can tell you, procedures cannot be ambiguous or subjective, or bad things happen, like friends yelling at each other over where a toy soldier can be placed on the table.

The simplest solution is to replace Proximity Vectoring with an objective rule of some kind. the simplier is something like, "If a model cannot complete its move legally, then it moves as far as it legally can, and then stops."

The only real issue I can see with this is, in a game where you can pre-measure everything, and positioning matters, this will create some odd situations... The most extreme being models ending up locked in place because nothing can move while following all the rules. More common will be players trying to abuse this rule to obtain the ideal attack position. Adding a caveat that "if a normal move is not conducted, then no weapon or boarding attack can be conducted" may be necessary.

However, this will still lead to situations where a player will want to pre-measure movement so they can still attack... And most of the time, this will be possible, due to the extremely high number of legal moves.

I once tried to figure out the full range of motion for a Dindrenzi Cruiser, because I wanted to know where I would be able to line up a Forward-Fixed shot based on the starting location. I quickly gave up, and tried to do so with the Praetorian. Even imposing artificial constraints, such as only full 1" Movement and full 45 degree turns, I still had something like 64 legal moves.

I think this is why there isn't a rule already, because you have so much freedom of movement to best position your models. Creating a rule as above would seem like a restriction on this freedom. Never mind the current rules already severely restrict this freedom in certain situations...

Ultimately, a balance between freedom of movement and ease of gameplay must be found, while removing all subjectivity from the rules so there is no room for arguement about how to play the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Proximity Vectoring and "no base overlapping" rules has been around since V1.0, never had an issue with it because it worked. The peg/base was the mark by which you measured anything affecting the ship, that's what was important, so taking a model off peg for a few activations when/if things got clustered was no big deal. You still know exactly where the ship was for all intents and purposes, and if the base didn't fit you prox-vec.

All the annoyance and hassle being raised now in V2 is purely from the sudden enforcement of this no removal of ships ruling. Get rid that and at least half the problems listed here are fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More on topic... That "Fall of Dramos" box, will that be a new starter? I cant see that happening as Return of the Overseers just came out. Maybe a small campaign/story box with older ships that reflect the time? Im very interested in this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been assuming Fall of Dramos (again pure assumption) was going to be a boxed set but not necessarily a starter box.  I've also been wondering if it would just be a campagin book like Marauders of the Rift.  Just describing the historical battles surrounding the destruction of Dramos. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been assuming Fall of Dramos (again pure assumption) was going to be a boxed set but not necessarily a starter box.  I've also been wondering if it would just be a campagin book like Marauders of the Rift.  Just describing the historical battles surrounding the destruction of Dramos. 

 

That would be my preference given that Dindrenzi and Terrans already have a high model count, but who knows? There's always room for more awesome I suppose.  :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This situation should be rare, but it is a good question, and one that deserves an answer. FA was not designed as a hard tournament style game, so areas like this do have some grey associated with them. Leave it with me and I will come back to you all

 

Yeah we normally do not play as a hard tournament style - because it usually caters to a certain ..... persona.... Honestly we love FSA and your compny because the rules are great, the models are great, and the fluff is great. I don't want to seem like one of those people that look for the single most loophole to win a game - because that makes it fun for no one. 

 

It just that during the game (it wouldn't have affected the game anyway - My Dindrenzi were whooping butt) it was the weirdest oddity. Either way also swung to much in either persons favor - my full stop allowed me a full shot directly forward - if I moved through the cloud of enemies my rear would be presented instead of me being in the middle. 

 

Honestly its so rare so don't wrack your brain to much Alex  :P

 

 

EDIT: On topic - I love my dindrenzi but dear god not more of their ships. I am already back logged painting the ones I have :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something I have found that helps no end is very simple....

 

Between Firestorm, Planetfall and Dystopian Wars, I have many, many flight stands.   For the most common medium ( 40mm square) size, I have lots.

Over time, for various reasons (being dropped and cutting stems down for surface skimmers the two most common), they are now a wide assortment of lengths.

 

If your ships are sitting at an assortment of heights, it not only looks more natural, it also helps avoid proximity vectoring, and a similar problem in Dystopian wars- bases are not allowed to overlap, but there are no rules for when models conflict as they overhang bases....

 

TL;DR. Cut down some stems, it helps.

 

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something I have found that helps no end is very simple....

 

Between Firestorm, Planetfall and Dystopian Wars, I have many, many flight stands.   For the most common medium ( 40mm square) size, I have lots.

Over time, for various reasons (being dropped and cutting stems down for surface skimmers the two most common), they are now a wide assortment of lengths.

 

If your ships are sitting at an assortment of heights, it not only looks more natural, it also helps avoid proximity vectoring, and a similar problem in Dystopian wars- bases are not allowed to overlap, but there are no rules for when models conflict as they overhang bases....

 

TL;DR. Cut down some stems, it helps.

 

James

 

Alas the rules forum is already up in arms at that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

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.