Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
DanJ

Thoughts on New Rules

Recommended Posts

Guest John Bull

In Part 6 under Regimental HQ's it states "Each Formation needs to have a Command Unit, normally in the form of a Regimental HQ Battalion." The Recke and the Field Gun Battery are therfore part of the same Battalion. Under the glossary of terms for Battalion it states a Battalion is a collection of Units on the table top. They will act as a single block, moving and firing together.

Part 11 Under Bombardments it is clearly written in the 2nd paragraph "Firstly a Bombardment can only be made against enemy Battalions that have one or more Spotting Markers". Under Spotting "Any Battalion can make a spotting attempt at the beginning of its ranged attack segment".

 

In the case of the PE they lack a command vehicle which hurts them with the reduced command points. In the case of the ROF it is tactically stupid to include a move or fire bombardment only vehicle in a Combat Formation. You do not have the Command Points to improve the Command Test for Spotting needed due to the lack of a Spotter in the Formation and when you may need them to improve the dice for Disorder Check Command Test on combat Battalions. This is compounded by the Hotch being of Poor Quality Rating.

I can understand that from a game point then differences should exist between the various forces but the ROF in my opinon should have an artillery Formation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So according to John I was right, the Recke and the Field Guns are part of the same Battalion.

According to BenOne I was wrong.

Who's right?

I'm going to go with my original view I think.

I continue to be surprised by the total absence of Spartan commentary, feedback, answers etc. on the AC forum...

Cheers

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel the PE army list makes it pretty clear they're separate battalions, and the Recke is the command unit. You must look at the army list, not the formation page, for information on how to form up your units and attach units to formations. Note "normally" in John Bull's quoted rule. Also, a battalion mixed of tanks and infantry is too hard to figure out rules for!

 

(e: look at the CoA artillery formation's regimental HQ. i cannot believe those tiny flyers are meant to stay in base contact with the drone controller for the entire game!)

 

The problem with the spotting rule is that it wasn't updated with the formation activation rule. It's not clear if 'the start of a battalion's ranged attack segment' is at the start of the formation's ranged sequence (as you go through each step with all your battalions before moving on to the next step) or when the battalion makes its attacks (ie rolling dice) after having declared them, measured range etc earlier. The rule needs to be updated to fit with the new formation ranged sequence.

 

I played against the Russian starter box with my American starter box tonight. The Russian box was weak before, but now it's just terrible. The game was just me picking off a single unit off as many battalions as I could, favoring his next formation to activate, then watching my poor opponant fail disorder check after disorder check. The only battalion that made it into optimal range with enough units left to pose threat for a turn was a landship, which was taken off the table just afterwards. I'm surprised he was patient enough to play until the end, he's a good bloke. I want to swap boxes with him next game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest John Bull

I think we may be talking at cross purposes BenOne on the PE HQ. Here is my full thoughts on this.

To me the intention is that the Remcke which is a troop carrier (as in the Grenadier Regiment) transports the field battery until the player makes the judgement to deploy these tokens. As such they are part of the same Battalion. Part 15 Transports states that as such the tokens cannot be the target of Ranged attacks etc. Disembarking states that once they are disembarked they are considered to be a separate Battalion to their transport. 

This is the same for the COA drones or aircraft tokens of course.

What would be handy is for this to be pointed out in the statistics notes.

Your game report shows the problem Armoured Clash has at present with games of the size of the armoured brigade box. 

 

Andy I have read comments on other forums about Spartan "Cracking models **** rules" would be a fair summar of the negative view. Unfair as the basis of AC is a good game it just needs fleshed out a bit more. Quite normal for new rule sets but the lack of customer care by Spartan is frankly shocking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, the Recke an the Field Gun Battery of the Prussian artillery regiment form a single unit. The Recke may count as the command unit but as a whole the two Units form the HQ battalion and therefore have to activate together.

 

I also have to agree that the new rules for Armoured Clash seem to have some issues. I cannot compare them to the beta status since i went into the game just with the Sirocco book, but i would like to know why some of the core rules were changed so dramatically - since most of the active players does not seem to be so content with the release version.

 

 

I played against the Russian starter box with my American starter box tonight. The Russian box was weak before, but now it's just terrible. The game was just me picking off a single unit off as many battalions as I could, favoring his next formation to activate, then watching my poor opponant fail disorder check after disorder check. The only battalion that made it into optimal range with enough units left to pose threat for a turn was a landship, which was taken off the table just afterwards. I'm surprised he was patient enough to play until the end, he's a good bloke. I want to swap boxes with him next game.

 

 

.Are the Russians really that bad? Right now, i am quite glad that i didn't picked them as my 2nd Armoured Clash army after the Prussians and went on with the KoB instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having got the OK from those on high I can comment with my Beta Play Test hat on.

 

Please bear in mind that the Beta Test groups get sent material by Spartan, take a look at it, test it, then send feedback. We don't develop anything per-se.

 

The main thoughts on the AC rules were that they should further facilitate smoother quicker game play for bigger games. The whole formation activation mechanic helps with this (in my experience) as it means play is less broken up by switching from one player to another. While it is true that in a situation where 2 large formations are facing off the initiative can allow one to rather comprehensively knock the stuffing out of the other, encouraging large formations (as mentioned above). This does work both ways however as, much like in DW, being able to 'out-activate' your opponent is an equally useful tactic which is easier to do if your opponent has big formations.

 

The Command point issue was discussed at length. In my experience playing these rules there are usually just enough CPs to manage but they have to be managed carefully. Army formation is very important in that regard and I would agree that the brigade boxes need some additions to work well in most instances. 

 

I think something to bear in mind is that the Statistics, army lists and game cards have been left as online documents so that they can continue to be tweaked going forwards based on feedback. the focus was on sorting out and tidying up the rules set and not, at this point, refining every army list and model stat.

 

some ideas might (and I can't say for sure not being a Spartan developer) be developed more in future to reflect the intent, such as Speerschleuders providing spotting markers without spending CPs and the Russian cards helping the deal with disorder markers and so on.

 

hope this is of some help!

 

Mountbatten.

 

P.S. if you don't hear from me again the Spartan has come for me in the night for saying to much!  :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Mountbatten for stepping in with some insight :-)

 

We're only playing small game with one formation a side so we'll keep to the "battalion by battalion" approach else it's a case of initiative literally making it an all or nothing situation?

 

Perhaps you can answer the Prussian Mobile Artillery HQ question as per the debate above?  Opinion is cleary divided!

 

Cheers

 

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, thanks Mountbattan for the insight. At least i can understand some of the intentions behind the changes that were made on the rules - even if i did not know the old ones... ;)

 

Good to hear that the army lists are still undergoing tests and changes because there are still some issues.

 

 

I just have a few questions:

 

1. When you playtest rules like the ones of AC do you only construct "fair" armys or do you also test with extreme lists so you might be able to find out the parts where the rules might need some fixing?

 

2. The CP issue. Was this changed in favor of games with really large armys - so 2 brigades with about 10-12 formation when you should have enugh CP around? As i see things you should have enough CP at a certain game size so that the units that need them should have enough - like artillery formations, wary units and playing the game cards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really interested in too, with how many formations/Points you guys tested. But you can't tell us, that 1-3 Command Points each Turn are enough. In small games you can't even use the card Deck because you haven't the points to play most of the cards.

And distributeing the command points to formations at the start of each round didn't make this rather worse than better. With the old beta Rules you could use the carddeck really well in Games with 3 Formations. But now most of Armys could leave them home now because they don't have the points to use them.

 

It can't be that you are compelled to play the skyfortress and bunkercomplex in one Brigade only to get enough command points to handle with

 

I liked the beta rules, but some of changes make me a little upset. Even I had build 5 of the Core Nations Brigades.

 

This game has much potential, but I sad that changes partly went into a wrong direction and I have the feeling that this game was put into second place.

 

I hope more playtesters will tell us, about there experiances testing the game from beta status to now.

 

@Ologotai

Did you really mean one formation or one brigade? Because the rules say, that one brigade has 3-6 Formations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we may be talking at cross purposes BenOne on the PE HQ. Here is my full thoughts on this.

To me the intention is that the Remcke which is a troop carrier (as in the Grenadier Regiment) transports the field battery until the player makes the judgement to deploy these tokens. As such they are part of the same Battalion. Part 15 Transports states that as such the tokens cannot be the target of Ranged attacks etc. Disembarking states that once they are disembarked they are considered to be a separate Battalion to their transport. 

This is the same for the COA drones or aircraft tokens of course.

What would be handy is for this to be pointed out in the statistics notes.

Your game report shows the problem Armoured Clash has at present with games of the size of the armoured brigade box.

 

Looking at the army lists again, there's some suggestion that this is the intention. A transport can only be used by the battalion it was purchased for. The FSA Engineering regiment and the Russian Subterranian regiment both note in the army list which battalions may be transported in what unit. The Prussian artillery regiment does not note this for the Recke and the field guns. The CoA drone controller (the controller is not a transport and does not have airplane capacity) has a note in the army list that the drones are separate battalions. Again the Prussian Recke and field guns do not have this note in the army list.

 

But, since the disembarking rules says the field guns are a separate battalion, this does leave room for the Lightning Rod to spot for them.

 

Are the Russians really that bad? Right now, i am quite glad that i didn't picked them as my 2nd Armoured Clash army after the Prussians and went on with the KoB instead.

 

I can only comment on the Russian starter box, but it's not very good at all when compared to the others. The starter boxes all have a tank formation, an artillery battalion and a battalion that's unique to the race. But it appears the Russian artillery is not very strong, and it's hard for them to make good Spotting checks due to the low quality of their spotters. The landship could spot for them, but it'd need three successes. The driller seems difficult to use, but the infantry inside have some potential if you manage to get them all the way up there. Unfortunately for the Russians, the FSA starter box has much greater speed, quality and range, so the FSA can just sit at the back of the table. The Russians are generally slow, they only have two command points in the box, and the low quality of their troops makes it incredibly difficult to pass command tests, especially when they start failing the disorder checks. When combined with the fact they don't have the command points to bump up the dice colour of their tests, they're not in a good position. The repair cranes don't help much when I only need to remove one unit for them to start taking disorder checks.

 

The Russians may get a lot better when they start adding formations, for all I know, though! But I think their starter box could do with replacing the artillery battalion with something stronger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EotBS Brigade box doesn't have artillery (1 armoured cav., 1 Ashigaru and 1 heavy walker), which is odd as they are the bombardment faction. Actually makes the starter 'not that bad' as the only bombardment only formation is the Ashigaru, and that gets 1 CP from the (veteran)command gyro.

Looking at the current 1500pt forces, 'Special Manoeuvre' command ability is your friend - play one card without CP cost (just a 2 success command check - EotBS are good here as all command units are veteran). You can play the 3CP cards without just discarding them (first game with new rules, I discarded 4 out of 5 cards on most turns as I couldn't pay CP).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EotBS Brigade box doesn't have artillery (1 armoured cav., 1 Ashigaru and 1 heavy walker), which is odd as they are the bombardment faction. Actually makes the starter 'not that bad' as the only bombardment only formation is the Ashigaru, and that gets 1 CP from the (veteran)command gyro.

 

Hahaha I'm an idiot, neither does the Prussian box (they only have some field guns), and the French have artillery integrated into their main tank battalion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest John Bull

Looking at the post from Mountbatten it is clear that the changes were intended to shift product where Spartan after all will make their money. So just keep buying the product (and yes emmachine they do expect you to buy larger and more expensive models like the sky fortress) and maybe in 9 months someone from Spartan may bother to spare 5 minutes to look at the army lists and stats etc. No point discussing making Brigade boxes work they will not in this version and not intended to.

 

My favourite rule sets are produced by toofatlardies what a world of difference from Spartan. The latest set chain of command just published. Richard Clarke put up on you tube a number of videos explaining and demonstrating the game mechanics before publication. There is a very active yahoo group that Richard regularly responds to questions especially on a new set. He was on holiday in Wales last week and still looked in answering questiions through his mobile well beyond the call of duty but he is a top top man.

Here hello Spartan hello click "Sorry no one here at present but your purchases are important to us so please keep buying while holding on".

 

Rant over see you in 9 months then guys

cheerio

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like - despite Mountbatten's response - we are unable to flush out any Spartan commentary on AC :-(

I've written a pm to Chris Worth who has responded to a few rules questions in the past.

Cheers

Andy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me again (sorry Ologotai  :P )

 

Just to answer some of the questions on the play test methods.

 

The beta test group is quite dispersed so we play our own way and then compare notes so what I have been doing is certinaly not the be all and end all of the process!

 

In terms of fair vs extreme lists I have foudn that the army list makes it hard to 'power game' the lists too far with all but the most common formations being limited to 2 in the majority of cases. Generally I have been trying out varied lists (to see how everything does) but there have been games trying to shoehorn in lots of 'better' stuff. 'Hoard' armies with lots of medium tank formations (or equivalent), EOTBS mass walker of doom list (that one was quite nasty in fact), the COA battlecrab-arronax assault tag team etc but there was nothing we encountered that could not be taken on by a 'balanced' list. There are some things I have not tried (Russian double Land dread comes to mind). We tryed Aircraft spam as well but found this was not as overpowering as in DW due to the strafe WAR (or indeed the absence of) compartmentalizes the flyers into certain roles.

 

If anyone can think of any really tough lists I would be interested in hearing them!

 

In regards to average game size I have usually been playing 4-8 formation games though some a bit bigger. Something else that I think is worth bearing in mind is that Armoured Clash is a game of Massed Armoured combat. It is a system designed to be big and played well with a lot of figures. for smaller armoured games I personally would play with the Dystopian Wars rules. they focus a lot more on the smaller units and detailed effects of damage and weapons and so on. the reason for AC (in my opinion) is that the DW rules become rather cumbersome with a lot of units and like wise I think the AC ones get wierd and 'strained' at small sizes. Personally I find that 3 AC formations is generally a boarder-line size between the 2 games.

 

I know that might make me sound a bit like a spartan sales rep (Buy more to have more fun!) but there are 2 land rules sets and one works better bigger!

 

Anyway I am starting to ramble.

 

Hope this is interesting to some.

 

Mountbatten.

 

Mountbatten.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was wondering what point level people have been playing the game at. From the sounds of it many of you play less than 2k but I think that is the minimum. The two major rules changes promote larger armies. You need more Formations to generate more Command Points and to be able to fight a war of attrition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with the 'This works better with larger forces' statement - we tend to try for 2500pts+ (2000pts minimum) as we find anything smaller does not really work (when learning the beta rules we played 2 1500pt games in under 150 minutes, and never got past turn 3 in either).

Currently I have around 5000pts of EotBS up and read, and would expect to field around 3000-4000pts in a game, which we can finish in around 3 hours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys,

 

Thanks for your patience, apologies for the delay in responding to your queries - things have been all go here at Spartan HQ!

 

As several of you have said, the reason for the change in the way the activation sequence works was to speed up the flow of larger games. Armoured Clash has always been pitched as the way to play big tank battles, with lots of models on the table at once. We found as we continued to test the first rule set and received feedback from the community that, even with the streamlined damage mechanics, games were taking too long to play and players were needing several hours to reach the conclusion of a battle. The simple step of increasing the size of the 'chunks' that players activate at a time was found to greatly speed up the pace and keep games flowing.

 

We did initially worry that this might make the game a 'who goes first, wins' situation, but did not find this to be the case. When playing games at the intended size of 4 or 5 formations, you will be activating a quarter to a fifth of your force at a time - these 'chunks' are a bit larger than the Dystopian Wars equivalent, where you might be activating a 7th or 8th of your force in one go, but not so much as to unbalance the game. Unfortunately, at the lower end of the points spectrum a player who fields one maxed-out formation and two minimised regiments might have an advantage over a more balanced force if they can seize the initiative, but this should cease to be an issue once games reach a larger size.

 

While we would love to build one rules engine that works as well with under a dozen tanks as it does with fifty, that level of scalability isn't always possible - and that's why we created Armoured Clash in the first place. We always intended players to keep using the Dystopian Wars system for smaller games, where they can enjoy an extra level of detail - more granular damage, critical effects, greater flexibility with individual weapons systems and so on. Armoured Clash is designed to pick up where Dystopian Wars starts to get too long and cumbersome - so you can play big, epic games that capture the feel of sweeping formations and higher level tactics, without needing to devote a whole weekend to the task! Of course if you are wanting a way to play smaller games very quickly, and found the initial Armoured Clash rules a fun way to do that - that's great! By all means keep playing what you were enjoying, but please understand that was not what we intended the game to be and not where its future development will be aimed.

 

Regarding the Command Points issue, one of the recurring pieces of feedback we received was that players felt they had too many Command Points. Players reported that they simply seemed like an annoyance to keep track of, rather than a resource that needed to be carefully managed so you had them when you needed them. In response to this we cut down on the number of CP available, and placed more emphasis on the dedicated Command Vehicles. We believed this would encourage more planning and tactical choices, and make the game more enjoyable as a result. However, if you guys consistently report back that some nations are now really struggling, we will of course take another look and tweak some of the stats if necessary.

 

Thank you for your continued feedback, hopefully this helps you to understand what we are trying to accomplish with this games system. A forthcoming Blog will be explaining how we see the future of the Dystopian world, and the role we see our various games systems taking within it.

 

 

Chris W.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks chris for your response . So from that you are say is that to play ac you need to field around 2500 to 3000 points? Or more is that fair to say.

But again many thanks for taking the time to write and tell us all why

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Played a game with 2000 points yesterday.

 

You have to get HQ Untis in your List, otherwise your troops will fall apart, wenn being hit and disorder markers are cumulating.

 

Therefore 2000 points is the definit minimum for playing with these new rules.

 

But I think Russia will definitely lose with their poor morale, their HQ points should rise!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are planning our next game for either 2500-3000 points and as others have mentioned, the model choices are being driven by the need for command points.

 

Looking at the KOB, that means that the choices which are other than a MK1 Sovereign are not going to be very popular as the MK 2 & 3 and the Steward don't offer anything in command points. Simply for variety and flexibility sake, I'd offer at least an HQ 1 for a MK2or 3 or a Steward when in a command role otherwise we are getting into models that simply won't get taken much in HQ roles and that is where the majority of Sovereigns would normally be found.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I played another game. This time, I used the Russians versus the Americans. We used the starter boxes and added a medium tank formation to both armies, along with some command abilities and a second battalion of bombards for the Russian shock artillery. About 2100 points. I lost with the Russians pretty badly. The Belgorods don't tend to last all the way to within eight inches, even when steaming ahead every turn. The American Washingtons get to lay back and blast away with sixteen blue dice at sixteen inches! Also, the driller didn't do anything because I held it a bit too far back. It's failed to have an impact in every game so far, but I don't know how much of that is our own failings in using it. Having the Special Maneuver command ability is the best way to play cards, and it's only ten points. The Americans took Targeting Calculator on their rocket artillery which combined so well with Target Painter Generator. I really like the Tikhvin ironclads. I tried using the Mimic Generators to take the Guardian Generator from the Sovereign Mk. I. This helped out a little, but the Sovereign itself was blasted with rocket artillery right after the Belgorods were taken out by the Washingtons.

 

I feel there's a problem with the Russian spotters. I don't think they should be poor quality troops, it makes it necessary to put two command points into the spotting test and also means they're sucking up more command points to stay on the field once they start getting shot at.

 

Again, this was a small game, but I think the Russians can be improved upon. Having a weaker starter box makes for disappointing games which isn't great for convincing someone to keep playing.

 

 - Having Regular-quality spotters is essential.

 - Consider giving the Belgorod and Kursk an extra command point each. Perhaps HQ (2) for the Shock Armoured Belgorod and HQ (1) for the Shock Artillery one? I think the Kursk should be at least HQ (3).

 - Increase the second Belgorod kill rating to 9/6/5?

 - The card that lets Russians remove lots of disorder markers is great, but it doesn't seem likely to be drawn? The card that lets them move D3 inches for a command point is pretty lacklustre compared to the generic card that goes D6 inches for the same one command point.

 

Of course, I've only seen Russians play versus Americans. But I've heard of another Russian player struggling against the Japanese box.

 

Lastly, having a formation with zero command points is a lot less attractive when building army lists. It depends on the formation, though. I'll take the FSAAF special aerial recon any day of the week!

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.