Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
sleeping_squirrel

Beta 0.06 feedback

Recommended Posts

This is what I submited upon playing 750 point and 1300 point games in 0.06. It would be nice have your feeback as well.:

 

General notes

Games were played on 750 points and then on 1300 points. We did not use rules for reserves nor customised weapons except generators, to be precise only the Shield generator was used.

Version played 0.06.

In general we have positive feeling about the game, below are my notes which I would like you to consider.

Cards + initiative

Cards are too situational and hit or miss – you must be lucky to have a card on hand the moment you can use it. We played them only few times and most of the rounds in all games we just discarded cards at the end of the turn to draw new ones in hope of getting more useful hand. For example conditions like “killing the ship by ramming” are way to situational. Bonuses like rerolling one dice (“reroll any dice”) are very weak when you look at the sheer number of dice you are usually rolling, one dice does not matter most of the time. Or conditions like “killing a unit of small ships” or “cripple a unit of mediums” take time to fulfil so if those cards are drawn at the beginning of the game then it is better to discard them. Or at least that was our obvious strategy.

That leads me to the fact that we did not study which “types” of cards have high numbers because … initiative is still very crucial from round two on so cards with high numbers were kept just for the purpose of winning the initiative. It happened to me that I draw only cards with low numbers the whole game so my opponent won initiative every, not happy moments at all.

To recap – with limited usage and initiative too important the whole card game was only about having the card with highest number possible to win the initiative, all other aspects were secondary.

Question: if you have two or more cards with the same victory condition – can you play all of them when the condition is fulfilled. For example after killing a unit of smalls can I play 2x card which gives me victory points for that and on top of that card which gives me a victory point for killing “any” unit?

Markers

Critical hits adding condition markers – it’s clumsy. Not only you have to keep in mind that some critical effects do that and some do not but, at least until you know the game well, you have to study the rules every time and flip pages to remind yourself what that particular condition means. And what is more – you just add two markers instead of one and only outcome is that the playing area is more cluttered. At one point we felt that there is the same amount of markers like in 2.0 edition.

There should be a marker or something to mark crippled models. With a lot medium models in 1300 point game you have two options: a) to stack all the damage next to the model and remember from what amount of damage the model is crippled = playing area is cluttered with more and more damage markers; b) make notes separately = bookkeeping and if you have all models painted in the same scheme than you have think about how to differentiate individual models in the squadron so you know which is which.

 

Boarding

For attacker it’s an uphill struggle with risks involved while effects of boarding are nothing special. In general Attacker is using FRAY against CITADEL+DEFENSE. Every additional model in the unit except the first one does not add its FRAY but +2 dice to the pool. CITADEL stat is usually much higher than FRAY and you add defence dice as well. +1 dice for SRS is a joke and defender can have this bonus as well. So, attacker starts with LESS dice and needs to score at least 4 more successes than defender to do at least something useful. As his dice explode, he can of course hope for excellent rolls but where is strategy in that?

The most problematic part about the boarding is that CITADEL stat does not degenerate with damage; it stays the same high number through the whole game. In 2.0 boarding was (too) strong but its main beauty was that you could weaken the ship before you committed your men to the assault.

Other game mechanics

LOS – I think more examples are needed in this section but in general everything was clear. However, blocking something is not easy; you basically can see and shoot everything in range, with obscured condition weight in only here or there.

Turn limit and torpedo interaction – from Turn limit (3) on this MAR is useless. Sure, you can roll more than 3 ones in one roll but what chances you have for that? In our opinion this MAR is to complicated for the effect it can bring to the game. Usability during the game is poor.

Penalties like -1 to FRAY (or minus one dice in general) are worthless – usually you roll so many dice that having the rule of adding/subtracting one dice does not have an effect at all.

Generators – powering them up is not a good rule at all. First, generators are weak as due to linking mechanic more turrets is more dakka and that is what is handy every time, generators have limits. Second, you have cards and other means how to power them up so you can always have them up if you like. Third, if you have more generators in the fleet than it’s easy to lost track of which generators are up and which are not so one need to take notes = additional bookeping.

What was obvious is that all weapons are basically the same, there is no paper-stone-scissor mechanic in this part of the rules - more dakka is more dakka. For example firing with gunnery weaponry felt the same like firing with broadsides – differences were minor.

I like consistency in rules so I definitely do not like the fact that “heavy hit” is one success but “heavy counter” is two successes. Terminology should be consistent.

Then you factor in “double-obscured” rule with exploding dice giving only one “heavy hit” – is it necessary? I like the rule but when already in the rulebook it should be used more and not only in this one particular situation.

 

Other notes

Unit balance – it needs to be worked on, some units felt under costed or over costed but I do not have any evidence as we did not play enough games to back up our feeling with some data. In general smalls felt too fragile. Flying models, as they do not get any cover, were targets from the turn one on 4x4’ table, especially flying smalls and mediums were taken down very quickly, immediately after someone focused on them.

Large models are fine, in close range they can deliver huge amount of dice so basically no matter what their target is, they always scored hits. I like their speed, however, smalls lost another important unique aspect of being much faster that large models. We definitely did not feel that flotilla of smalls can outmanoeuvre fleet consisting of large ships only.

This one little bit tricky – we kind of missed “WOW” situations which were in 2.0: the moments where lucky dice rolls completely change dynamic of the game. It is difficult to say why that is – probably it is because all ships have more HP in general but on the other hand you deal more damage as well. Most of the time you just add damage markers "without any immediate impact" or ship dies too quickly.

Length of the game – games took us to play similar amount of time like 2.0 edition. Small points game – 750 points – were nice and fluent but with only handful of ships. With 1300 points per side we played 3+ hours and the game was decided in turn 3, which exactly matches usual length of 2.0 games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have played one battle of 0.6 and a few of 0.5 and I have similar experiences as you with one big difference and that is when the game ends. They only end in turn 3 if one of the sides are too aggressive and so far with a loss to the one that speed their ships into range of the opponent too fast. It is impossible to approach in a non staggered manner and will result in giving the opponent the ability to combine its firepower piece meal on the enemy.

 

In the last battles fleets have usually deployed more carefully and almost never pointing directly forward or deployed too far forward. The reason is so we have the option to turn away and have the enemy give chase or maneuver to a better firing position. In one game a few frigates on a flank diverted two cruisers to turn on them and they in turn did not close and essentially pulled them of the fight for the entire game as a result, had the cruiser not don this they would have had the frigates firing torpedoes at them the entire game form their back while facing a battleship in front of them.

 

We might be playing in slightly bigger playing areas though so maneuvering is a bit more interesting.

 

I otherwise agree that buckets of dice make certain modifiers pointless... but only if both players speed into close range in turn two/three.

 

I also think that small ships are too vulnerable against heavy guns at long range, these weapons should essentially be worthless at long range and weak at medium range. Secondary weapons should be the weapon of choice against them. Even torpedoes are too effective against small ships at long range.

 

I certainly agree that re-rolling defense die is pointless above 3 turning limit, even 2 is perfectly OK most of the time. I think that you should get one re-roll for half the turning limit (rounded down). 1-2 give on dice, 3-4 give two dice... this is not really hard to calculate. I know they don't want to count stuff but the current model is not  very good.

 

I must say that I'm not to keen on the rules anyway but then again i never liked the old rules either, trading ships seem to be the common theme quite often and rubs me the wrong way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Played two games of 0.6 today and I must say that mortars and large squadrons of torpedo carrying destroyers or submarines is boring.

 

Mortars are just OP... or at least very difficult to deal with and just don't promote much maneuvering at all. We played on a 4 by 5 feet area with roughly 13-1600 points.

The crown had basically three battleships and two squadrons of two support carriers.  All battleships had three Mortar turrets and the carriers battle-group training. The one giant 6 squadron destroyer was in reserve. The battleships and cruisers simply deployed in a line as far back as possible with the cruisers tucked behind them to support with air cover. Having Ace Pilots did not make this any more difficult either. The opposing fleet we made a bit more conventional with a slant of being good at something... be it close range fighting or something else.

 

Basically no matter what the enemy composition they would get stuck with destroyers in the back and a broken fleet from mortar fire from the battleships. It is VERY difficult to close with a line moving perpendicular at the outer reach of the battlefield and not become clumped up for mortar fire to completely wreck the fleet and then the destroyers show up at a nice flank and make the process short of what is left.

 

The problem is not just the effectiveness of these weapons but also the lack of any semblance of maneuvering or use of actual tactics... it is just a measure of throwing dice at the opponent with little to no real thought. Those mortar hit with 16 dice blast templates AND can fire indirect as well if needed. The fact they have bad stats at point blank is a moot point and not very important. Some small luck with the cards and you will do insane amount of damage.

 

It simply is too easy to pick and chose the most threatening targets and wear them down, line of sight is too easy and there are way too little room to maneuver effectively at these ranges and the size of battlefields. The only counter seem to be your own mortars and then it certainly become a dice fest with no one really wanting to close the distance at all.

 

Weapons and systems that remove maneuvering as a means to achieve your goal MUST be very limited, this include certain long range heavy damage weapons and large squadrons of small ships. These elements remove allot of the tactical maneuvering with just throwing dice at the opponent and hope for the best.

 

I also don't understand why mortars is a long range weapon... it should be a short range weapon. Mortars shells are low speed, they have to be in order to have a steep curve and drop on top of the opponent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

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.