Jump to content
GuzizuG

UK Expo 2016 Aftermath and Cheesy List

Recommended Posts

I think that changing the rules to 'fix' activation spam is as Thamoz says something to do with great care. Version 2.0 of the rules came to life after a lot of hard work by the designers and player testers. Given the vast range of possible combinations for putting together fleets playing with the rules risks the play balance of the game which for me is one of the key strengths of it. I would not want to lose that. Letting the tournament organisers control their tournaments by adding additional rules around fleet construction may seem clumsy and inelegant but is a safer way ahead as such rules affect all the factions or combinations of factions more or less the same. Although there are bound to be exceptions. Using Scenarios from Ironclad, which is excellent, is a less clunky way of doing the same thing.

The way I would like to minimise activation spam is to field a fleet list that makes activation spam a weakness rather then a strength. Lurking Vanguards suggestion that my fleet is beatable by a gun line fleet I believe to be correct the problem is most people will not play a gun line fleet as it itself is vulnerable to a lot of other fleets. Further as Booboohamster points out Gun Line fleets are even further compromised by scenarios with objectives.

One other thought. I play mainly 1,000 or 1,250pt games. If you up the points in the game does activation spam become more or less effective?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think that upping the points the trend carries on, because your filling the points with more carriers

The problem is that most carriers across the board have firepower decent enough to offset the difference between themselves and a battleship, but the added bonus of an extra couple of activations

This doesnt make it a real choice between a carrier and battleship.....most of the time

Activation spam is a blight on the game, something which Firestorm doesnt have, the solution however alters the delicate balance of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of launching first turn. This somewhat solves the activation spam from carriers. However, I tend to find that activation advantage is more of a turn one, maybe turn two thing. In our matches usually mid turn two there is a mighty gun battle going on. More so how do you deal with activation spam from spotters(looking at the Raj Canda), mini subs, motor boats etc?

 

(on a side note, you all know that that filthy french super fortress of doom suffers from triple degradation with all its main weapons, just hit it a few times and its effectively neutered)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not apply a points cost to SAWs like Firestorm? 5pts per SAW?

Carriers would have their points cost increased by 30 - 45pts across the board because of the Carrier MAR, but LAS would have to be paid for separately

The best way to stop an exploit would be to put a price tag on the main culprit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merlin, its a nice idea, but there isnt balance between carriers to ba able to make a blanket change....look at simething like the savanah....it has broadsides for 165 points, now a tourbillon is 170 has similar broadsides and stats, turrets, rockets , similar stats

or the imperium which is 150 for more weapons and similar stats and slightly less sas

Dystopian went wrong by having wings that could be split....a firestorm system of 1 token representing the wing should have been it, i dont mind buying sas if thats is the case....you then purchase 1 wing of sas up to 5 planes squads...launch when the carrier activates, move when the carrier does

fleet carriers should have a special rule for allowing an extra token.

 

problem i can see with that is that fleet carriers could be very powerful indeed if you launch two wings of bombers that cant be countered because they activate at the same time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My second gripe is about limitless SAS

The old refueling rule was dumb and im pleased it changed, but.it was relplaced by the carrier points system of limitless planes (in theroy)

these ships dont have limitless space yet we are meant to swallow that squads can be replenished till infinity as long as one sas marker is still alive....why??

oh look my 1 fighter can now be 5 again....and dive bombers...and be activated next....against your damaged battleship...hurray!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm getting anti Republic sentiment from you BBH^^

I agree with Thyphs and Merlin

I much prefer the firestorm armada system, most carriers are actually slightly weaker than battleships, not the same or better, and sas (called srs in firestorm) activate with the carrier, a big rule for keeping sas spam inline in armada is you have to pay 5pts per wing, so carrier 6 would cost you 30points for the actual tiny planes.

and I think its those sort of rules that would change the game for the better:)

Also on Thyphs last point, sas that retask should get an activation marker.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ohm said:

By any chance, does someone here have the full listing of battles? Who played against who and with what result?

Your best bet would be to get hold of Chancer who ran the tournament he should have all the details

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, thyphs said:

My second gripe is about limitless SAS

The old refueling rule was dumb and im pleased it changed, but.it was relplaced by the carrier points system of limitless planes (in theroy)

these ships dont have limitless space yet we are meant to swallow that squads can be replenished till infinity as long as one sas marker is still alive....why??

oh look my 1 fighter can now be 5 again....and dive bombers...and be activated next....against your damaged battleship...hurray!!

Maybe replenishment of SAW's by carriers should be treated the same way as CoA drones where you have to dice to see how many you get back? Make it consistent across all the factions? Won't make any difference to activation spam in the early stages of a game but certainly will make carriers less effective in the longer game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice idea....or all deployed sas are squadron support and the carrier points reflect the actions they can take during the game

so say a carrier 6 model

it has 6 points to spend during the game....this reflects replacement planes, bombs ect ect

every two points of damage -1 carrier action

replace a plane squad -1 per wing

replenish ordanance -1 per squad

retask -2 per squad

that way you actually have to think about your SAS and not just rely on being able to bring back fighters, change to bombers, rearm ect ect

so you have to spend your carrier points during the game...its actually quite tactical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I would be an advocate for all the SAS and various free tiny squadrons to activate with their carrier 1st turn for launching then go about as normal turn 2 onward. That way buying a 40 point Apollo isn't a 3 activation steal, and later in the game you couldn't have a single crazy activation of a fleet carrier and multiple units of SAS in one go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll put up the UKGE results this weekend.

My possible thoughts on carrier/activation Spam would be to limit it to 1 carrier per large capital model of another type.In order to have a carrier you must have a battle battle ship, 2 battle ships 2 carriers. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a bad idea, however some nations have medium carriers and the operational asset apologies carrier is very cheap for 3 activations itself.  Additionally the coa (why yes, I assets biased:P) struggle to field a non-carrier large vessel that is not an e-turret aristotle.

Limiting the large carriers shift the activation spam onto the medium section, at which point some nations have the natural advantage of naval medium carriers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think whatever way you try and house rule it, it will benefit or hurt certain nations, as Thamoz points out at the league we are trying to limit sas squadrons, but that hurts factions such as the raj and ottomans.

Realistically the only way its going to be sorted is an overhaul of the core rules:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be all for an over haul of the rules, I do think Spartan have been chipping away at the balance of the game, for me as a KoB player I have gone from:

I have absolutely no chance what so ever TO Well I have a fighting chance against most fleets, not French ofcourse, but most.

For me the SAS spam and the ridiculous ease of capturing Battle ships with blokes in rubber dingies need resolving first

Make a nice reference sheet, an ease read rule book with references to linking rules and the pages they can be found on BOOM!

Dystopian Wars, for me, has been one of the easiest games to sell people on the visual and character of the setting.  Problem is always when you sit down and play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with people asking for a look at the core rules...have you had a look at fleet action?

(I haven't played a game yet) but it seems to have made a good job of streamlining rules. It also seems to quite nicely limit the excesses of SaS spam and the small ship boarding rush is less like an instant win if it gets through. 

It also seems to retain most of the features that actually give DW its tactical depth - namely positioning, alternating activations, and target selection. Maybe for some it takes out too much of the grit, but for me it seems like a big improvement. I know it's brand new and there are likely some rules glitches to be found, but nothing that a house rule/FAQ can't sort.

(once I get the hang of fleet action I'll probably be putting back in the different size turn templates and critical hits effects, just cos I've always liked those bits of DW... But fiddly boarding, applying damage before linking calculations and swarms of SAS I will happily leave out)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for my part like swarm of sas. And sas rules was made a lot easier.

 

Setup is also very very cool now. It's one of the best setups I have seen! Maybe one could improve the role of recon at setup, but that's an other story.

 

But looking at the core rules and balance is good. Not only the balance between different nations, but the balance between the different classes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14.6.2016 at 7:37 PM, thyphs said:

I personally never saw the point in local air support....its a way to give everyone more pointless activations

I dont even buy the myth that there there to help people without carriers take on aerial units, because your opponent gets the same

wouldnt something along the lines of....if you dont take a carrier then you get 5 free local sas, if you do then you loose the free stuff...makes it actually a choice between a battleship and a carrier....unless your french then you can still have the tourbillon which is both!!

It adds some spice especially to smaller games. It adds a little advantage to naval core lists against air core lists, because fighters can attack dive bombers and air units while being useless against ground targets.

I like the idea of all SAW being activated at the end of the turn to prevent activation spam. The WAS activation phase could be divided according to the SAW types: First activate all fighter SAW, then activate all bomber SAW, then activate all spotter SAW. This way You have a chance of intercepting bombers before they strike. It also somewhat pulls the teeth out of sky fortress carrier spam lists against naval core lists, because ground attack craft are easier to intercept than air attack craft.

If the order of activation rules are going to be changed, recon planes might get useless because they have to be activated before other units use their spotting markers: Make the spotting roll when the firing model is activated, thus not needing the spotter to be activated at all. It just has to be placed.

I personally like the SV system. I also think that most carriers all well priced. I even think that some naval  carriers should decrease their SV, for example Avenger, Kiyohime and Couronne. This is to represent they are easier to take out than their sky fortress counterparts that have as many SAW. Spartan already decreased the SV of some carriers like the Rhine, but they inconsequently passed the other ones. Btw, SV of the Deathbringer submarine is too high imho. In my local gaming group it always gave much more VPs to the opponent  than it destroyed itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem lies in the volume of activations not in what order SAS activates.

I dont think tying SAS into a specific activation works either, all that would do would encourage fighters which would get re-purposed eventually...

 

I think firestorm is on the correct track with their SRS system

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I mean is an activation phase for SAW at the end ot the turn. This way no SAS is activated until all physical units have been activated. This means no ini sinking by SAW, and all units get to make their game before the SAW impact. The second thing I proposed was to divide the SAW activation phase according to the type of SAW. Babylon 5 ACTA used something similar and it worked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the way Firestorm Armada handles SAS. However I do not dislike the way DW handles SAS. Activation spam is an issue, but I don't think carriers make battleships completly obsolete. I tend to take both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the meantime...(while awaiting DW 3.0 with Firestorm style SAS or whatever might come)....if your group is having a rough go on balance due to a dominant activation spam environment, I suggest testing this simple house rule.

 

1. When you begin a game, each player has an SAS activation marker. (Determine the nature of the SAS marker howeve you wish. I suggest a small statue of Cthulhu. Or a poker chip!)

2. When a players activation turn begins, if they have the SAS marker, they may spend it to activate an SAS squadron.

3. At the end of a players activation phase, if they activated a non-SAS squadron, and do not hold an SAS marker, they gain an SAS marker for future use.

 

 

Essentially, this is just a tracking mechanism for a house rule that prevents players from selecting SAS in back to back activations. It is the most simple yet clear and track-able method I have figured so far. The entire goal would be to force an SAS spam list to move a few fleet elements....rather than for example having 8 or more SAS activations in a row to begin turn one.

 

I think SAS are great and all. However an SAS spam list that is designed primarily for the reason of forcing the other player to move first again and again.....simply to gain a dominant initiative advantage on turn one, is silly and not especially fun. (Also really effective, which is why this is an issue for many players.) This house rule removes none of the effectiveness of SAS, but does blunt the importance of SAS spam lists in gaining a huge advantage on turn one. I will test this myself....it is just a "problem solving" exercise for me mentally due to this thread currently. The marker exists solely to avoid players forgetting or arguing over activation history.

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.