Jump to content
Toxic_Rat

Movement Changes?

Recommended Posts

Heh.  I was worried I would get shouted down myself even posting the video, but the forum seems to have changed a bit since a year ago and isn't so toxic.  I encourage you to speak your mind.  

@Commodore Jones if you don't think it will work, or simply don't like it...it would be really useful to know why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skip the number ratings and just use the Degree as the Turn Stat.  No need to make people look up something when you can transmit all the necessary information in three characters or less.

And speak up @Commodore Jones. Good reasons for not liking something should always be welcome.

Edited by alextroy
To not double post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed 180 ° is far easier understand at a glance, and we should probably do that.  I was just trying to accommodate a TL  number as part of the maneuver/collision tests as it used to be.  I'm sure other mechanics could be used for collision that are serviceable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inevitably, someone will have a situation where they cannot legally move a model with this system.  I have yet to figure out a good solution; one option is to “borrow” Movement from a future Turn, while suffering some kind of immediate penalty.

Like using a Waypoint, a player should be allowed to use this special move at any time, but it should always be a bad idea to do so.  For example, maybe the Model suffers a Half Move damage effect which you cannot even attempt to Repair until the following Turn, or maybe it’s a permanent effect.

Another option is to forbid anything offensive for using this extra move, but I don’t think this is the right way to go.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Stoobert said:

@Kaptyn Krys thank you and I'm glad you like it.  Re: hypotenuse it's a good point of clarification.  The ship is actually traveling to the waypoint, then on to the destination, so the sum of these two "sides of the triangle" is what is compared to the MV value.    The 1" cost to place waypoint may not be necessary, but it does help prevent people from using waypoints unnecessarily, and makes sense from a physics/fluff perspective.  

OK gotcha. You measure from start to waypoint and waypoint to finish and that's the distance travelled. I guess the 1" cost for placing a way point can then be up for debate. 

With the start point  and way point are both limited to your rear arc and I am also struggling to think of a situation where it could be abused and it limits extraordinarily tight turns around terrain. 

I'm also glad the "move in a circle and stay in place" has gone. Always irritated me. If a ship wants to remain in place it should cut its engines. Imagining flocks of tier 3s doing endless loops the loops always broke my suspension of disbelief. I hope Warcradle take a serious look at this, or at least something similar. It removes clumsy turn templates, is still fairly unique as far as I'm aware. Its not a shameless rip off of a X-Wing type system. I'd think it would also work well for aircraft in Planetfall. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@alextroy agreed.  It's far more more common to simply avoid asteroids, and if you do collide, that's when you can look it up in the rules.

@fracas it certainly could, especially if it saves time.  Others have proposed a "lead model moves, and its squadron falls in behind, somewhere within coherency and within its rear arc".  The rotation of the following models could use the same origin point as the lead model.  Give it a try if you can and let me know how it works.

@varnos FSA does not have the "hit and run" that you describe.  FSA is always "move first then fire".   I suppose the waypoint could be adapted for your DW purpose or you could simply split your move in half and move once, then twice.

@Kaptyn Krys Yes I used 'move in circles' so much playing Aquans that I started to annoy myself, goodness knows how annoyed my opponents must have felt.  ;):(  Anyways, there's no reason smaller ships can't get a bonus to move directly from Full Stop to  Full Speed thereby getting a similar advantage without the 'in circles' bit.

@all I played a 800pt game last night with a friend and we played this movement system.  He liked it a lot, for what that's worth.  I never actually introduced waypoints at all, just to see what would happen.  He didn't complain or notice, and  only once was I in a situation where a waypoint would have been useful for me to get around terrain more quickly.  Waypoints' usefulness truly does seem to be uncommon, the only reason I conceptualized waypoints at all was to approximate how in 2.0 you could turn the corner around asteroids in a single turn.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about this simple method for movement:  your move value is the number of forward inches you can move.  Each 45 degree turn you make during movement  costs a number of inches of movement depending on the bulk of the vehicle.  Turns are made in place, at any point during the move, and as many times as you want as long as you have the movement for it.  This represents small maneuvering thrusters slowing the ship down and turning it, vs larger forward thrusters pushing it straight.  Very easy and fast; no templates or charts or funny stuff but would still get the job done.  Represents inertia well, which is really the ONLY thing in space movement (there is no hydrodynamics or aerodynamics like in naval or aerial movement which necessitate movement arcs and banked turns and whatnot).  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, theguy said:

What about this simple method for movement:  your move value is the number of forward inches you can move.  Each 45 degree turn you make during movement  costs a number of inches of movement depending on the bulk of the vehicle.  Turns are made in place, at any point during the move, and as many times as you want as long as you have the movement for it.  This represents small maneuvering thrusters slowing the ship down and turning it, vs larger forward thrusters pushing it straight.  Very easy and fast; no templates or charts or funny stuff but would still get the job done.  Represents inertia well, which is really the ONLY thing in space movement (there is no hydrodynamics or aerodynamics like in naval or aerial movement which necessitate movement arcs and banked turns and whatnot).  

 

 

Or for x movement forward you can make a turn up to 45 degrees for 1 mp 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2018 at 2:01 AM, fracas said:

Or for x movement forward you can make a turn up to 45 degrees for 1 mp 

 This works as well.   So much easier than templates but will give similar effect.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, fracas said:

Corner of a square base

Not precise enough for competitive play.  The Litco FSA Movement template was very handy.  While it was too fat & long to be useful in the inevitable furball, it was fantastic for determining weather or not a Target was within a firing arc, which is really important when both movement and weapon fire are significantly limited.

Strangely, it just now occurred to me this combination of restricted movement (especially turning), firing arcs, and range bands is why the game works.  These limitations naturally create limited playing options, which leads to the player often needing to chose between several viable choices.

The alternating activations also lead to these choices, which is why it is such a good system for Turn-based play... and why larger games are more interesting.  You are more likely to have a hard time choosing which Squadron to activate when you have more options.

This naturally leads me to question: what is the point of diminishing returns for the number of Squadrons each player fields?  It should be pretty clear that one extreme, two Squadrons, is too few to realiably create tough choices... while 100 is overwhelming, so the tendency is to just go with the first good-looking option.

Thankfully, someone already figured it out: 7-10.  The first phone numbers were seven digits long, because a significant enough number of people had trouble remembering 8 digits.  However, some players are smarter than the average bear, so they should have the option to bring a few more Squadrons.

It’s probably a happy coincidence that at 1200 points, most fleets hit this range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I like how FSA movement gives that slow turn of the ship feel, it is problematic because it is impossible to determine exactly where your ship will end up without actually doing the move. Whether we use template or rotations. How often you can 'turn'  and how far just changes the mechanics, but doesn't solve the basic problem. In most games, you can measure between your starting and ending point and just move the model there.

That's what I like about @Stoobert's proposal. No multiple 'movements' from shifting the template to get you to the end point. No uncertainty about  just how far you can turn. Just decide on an eligible end point and put the model there with a simple rotation to an legal angle. So much faster than any alternative I've heard so far.

Edited by alextroy
Grammer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good movement suggestion  @Stoobert, I could see how it would be much faster than the current method. I will be giving it a try at some point. Personally I do not see why people do not like it, but I would like them to explain why they have problems with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know after practicing the waypoint system a few times to get the basic rules down pat, I really like this system. Tough to explain to people but smooth and absolutely a quicker system than the current rules. I think what confuses people is the way you move simulating the end result of that maneuver while efficiently skipping a lot of the middle-bits of resolving a move.

I actually liked the 2.0 movement with the spartan green tool but I think this is a much smoother and more elegant way to move a squad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate the feedback guys.   Not being a professional wordsmith there may be a better way to explain it, so I made a video instead.

In those circumstances where you're not sure if your ship will fit at the destination, or the movement will be finicky or otherwise a close call, a Pac-man-like or L-shaped template can be optionally placed before movement.  Note that jaws of Pac-man converge on the center point of the base, making it easy to find the original position for reference or re-place and re-attempt.   A cruiser with a 180degree movement zone would look like this.

movement_.jpg.30247f1cd6e12cef9528ffd9e662ce0b.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any system that can't be explained easily in text and pictures needs changing. Whilst videos etc are all great, you have to design for the simplest scenario of "person gets a book and reads it" and can then play. You also need precision if you're going to have anything that has a hope of working in competitive/tournament play, which I believe is a key desire of many players. As soon as you start introducing things like "eyeball", "rough", "imagine" and "optional" things get messy fast. Look at the few optional rules in FSA v2 - they caused all sorts of headaches in play (casual and competitive)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • 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.