Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Meatshield

Updated Marauders PDF

Recommended Posts

http://www.spartangames.co.uk/resources/downloads

Firestorm Armada section, look for "Marauder PDF"

New Gunship stats present (aft torpedoes though?), Opportunity Cruisers still 2-5 in a squad, are the store packages still as they are? Does this mean Opportunities are staying 2-5?

Presentation wise it looks pretty good, I haven't had the chance to properly comb through, so I could have easily missed things. Important to note the red text on the very first page though, that could be worrisome as detail is sharply lacking.

Apologies if this is a repeat of a thread in the Marauders section, I figured General is a good place to attract attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I note a lack of mines- the aft torps could be a sneaky-beaky way of seeing if a more weapon system-like profile for mines would work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possible, but mines at present allow for flexible placement that doesn't always force showing the vulnerable sector to an enemy. Aft torps means you have to have something in the aft arc to use at the end of movement. With mines you can deploy at angle and turn to protect the vulnerable arc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the new layout with the ships next to their rules.

Was hoping for some rules-tweaking on the Syndicate and Traders though (seeing as Omnidyne got slightly tweaked). 3.0 isn't too far off though.

Now if SG could only ...ship the damn ships! It's almost June. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate that they say "the entire background material will be replaced"...WHY? This bacground follows on from the first Marauders book, why do Spartan now change that? I hope they mean they will add to it, and not change - this is always a big turn off for me when a company does these changes for no reason.

Share this post


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

I note a lack of mines- the aft torps could be a sneaky-beaky way of seeing if a more weapon system-like profile for mines would work.

:rolleyes: I can neither confirm nor deny your observation :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Archer12 said:

I hate that they say "the entire background material will be replaced"...WHY? This bacground follows on from the first Marauders book, why do Spartan now change that? I hope they mean they will add to it, and not change - this is always a big turn off for me when a company does these changes for no reason.

They may mean the section will be replaced, rather than the information. A re-write of the info we have, to make it more interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Kaptyn Krys said:

:rolleyes: I can neither confirm nor deny your observation :ph34r:

Hopefully that means you're being weird about denying it, because Mines, while somewhat messy, actually serve a purpose in a tactical game. Behold:

"Oh, you want to go behind me - I'll put a bunch of explosive **** there so you will suffer if you do."

"Balls, now I need to stay out of that area or all that **** will blow up on me, and then he'll turn around and shoot me with uncomfortably large weapons."

Under the "Mines = Rear Arc Torps" thing, the same interaction goes:

"Good thing there's no area-denial stuff stopping me from going behind you to shoot you with my uncomfortably large weapons."

"****, I miss Mines. And I wish that I had sold my Dindrenzi while people could still be fooled into thinking anything other than Gunships was a good idea."

Now, I play a lot of teleport-heavy lists. Take away Mines and suddenly the board is my playground, and the mobility difference conquers all.



Better solution to the current issue of many many Mine tokens - MAKE THEM DISAPPEAR AT THE END OF THE TURN. Suddenly the mess is gone! AND THEY STILL FUNCTION IN A WAY THAT ISN'T MORONIC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Flamebeast said:

Hopefully that means you're being weird about denying it, because Mines, while somewhat messy, actually serve a purpose in a tactical game. Behold:

"Oh, you want to go behind me - I'll put a bunch of explosive **** there so you will suffer if you do."

"Balls, now I need to stay out of that area or all that **** will blow up on me, and then he'll turn around and shoot me with uncomfortably large weapons."

Under the "Mines = Rear Arc Torps" thing, the same interaction goes:

"Good thing there's no area-denial stuff stopping me from going behind you to shoot you with my uncomfortably large weapons."

"****, I miss Mines. And I wish that I had sold my Dindrenzi while people could still be fooled into thinking anything other than Gunships was a good idea."

Now, I play a lot of teleport-heavy lists. Take away Mines and suddenly the board is my playground, and the mobility difference conquers all.



Better solution to the current issue of many many Mine tokens - MAKE THEM DISAPPEAR AT THE END OF THE TURN. Suddenly the mess is gone! AND THEY STILL FUNCTION IN A WAY THAT ISN'T MORONIC.

Here's the thing, though; as a starting point, this method would solve two problems- minelaying is a mess, rules wise right now. It breaks the sequence of movement, which is already one of the most contentious aspects of the game in terms of time usage. This makes it more in line with other weapons and where in the game they are handled. In addition this breaks mine-bys, which while not necessarily broken definately made ships with mines far more powerful than their cost suggests in specific scenarios. This isn't to say you're wrong, because you definately aren't, BUT it is a good place to start.

 

The natural progression would be to add the effect of being able to place a mine marker, as we do now, in the event there are no valid targets for the mine attack. Now the mine weapon fires alongside every other weapon in the game, can't mine-by to eat whole squads, and can still be used to area-deny. Much cleaner, and supports all currently discussed objectives of changing them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Hive said:

The natural progression would be to add the effect of being able to place a mine marker, as we do now, in the event there are no valid targets for the mine attack. Now the mine weapon fires alongside every other weapon in the game, can't mine-by to eat whole squads, and can still be used to area-deny. Much cleaner, and supports all currently discussed objectives of changing them.

I can get on board with this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy way to handle - Mines become secondary weapons with a rear arc and range band (4") - which I think is what Hive is saying. no need to make them torpedoes which is just weird and totally out of the game feel

Share this post


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

×
×
  • 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.