GREAT! Thre questions: 1)Could you please tell me name of these musics you use in your video? I like them a lot! 2) Why in this new tutorial www.youtube.com/watch?v=U19BKVxS2ko&feature=player_embedded on 7:26 model wich is not in base to base contact with any of 4 attackers become waxed? 3) on11:28 I see that line of sight of of Protelenes was blocked by bases of their own squad members, but not blocked by squad members models. So in Gruntz only models block LOS, not bases?
1) I will send you a PM about the music - I do pay a licence for it so I can't share the files but I can point you at them. 2) I must admit for the video I did not pay a lot of attention to the exact Gruntz I was waxing! So I did mean to place the token against the model in base to base but missed it and was more focused on showing the full mechanism. 3) Another oversight - I was again focused on just getting the roll in to show the result. I think there is a nearly a LOS from the models but I was not clear in video. It is bases.
First reaction, I really like the new assault rules. I look forward to playtesting them. They do seem a bit convoluted when written down but the flow chart you are using in the video would seem a great aid.
Just two comments initially. Under Attacker Assault Roll you talk about surviving attackers. This confused me as it immediately follows defender react attacks which happen after the attackers attack. Perhaps for clarity you should say attackers surviving reaction fire. Minor typo you say looser when meaning loser.
Second comment. The Overwatch rules in advanced rules are not very well developed. When exactly can a unit in overwatch fire? If I have a unit in overwatch beside a suppressed unit which is being assaulted can the overwatch unit fire at the assaulting unit? If so will any result stop the assault? I would guess it just thins the numbers of the assaulting unit.
One other thought. I wondered if cover modifiers should apply in assault. You say they do. I have no particular preference. If the assault continues to a second turn I would suggest neither unit should get cover bonus as the fighting is pretty much on the same terrain.
Overall great job as ever.
Last Edit: May 1, 2012 13:19:53 GMT -5 by timsnoddy
Robin, did you ever consider using D12 instead of 2D6 to eliminate the need for colored matching pairs? It seems the mechanics would standup just as well with D12 though the odds of hits and wounds would be slightly different.
I ask mainly from my own desire to play with LARGE scale armies yet still keep the games running fast and smoothly.
The importance of suppression adds a great feel to the game as it requires your units to work together--sometimes, in certain games, it almost feels as if each unit/squad is so independent of each other that players do not use them together--sometimes with good reason, because there is nothing in the rules set to justify it. With the update, there is a tactical incentive for cooperation between units/squads.
Robin, did you ever consider using D12 instead of 2D6 to eliminate the need for colored matching pairs?
I you use D12, instead of 2D6, you cant have "double 1 - always miss", "Double 6 - always hit", "if you have double 6 in shooting roll, you can reroll one "
Plus 2d6 gives you a bell curve while 1d12 gives you a straight probability. Not that that's a positive or negative change but it would mean repointing all the stats again because high stats are proportionatly more powerful with a 2d6 system.
cowomo404 The probability curve of a D12 is difficult for game designers. Some have tried to use it but it is territory I like to avoid. You basically get a random number between 1 and 12 (nearly) but with 2D6 you can control the curve because it is more likely that you roll between 6-8 on the two dice. This is exactly what you need if you want a game where there is some probability of result coming up that can be influenced by other factors.
I played Pulp City recently which is a single D6 game and my friend and I really struggled with it because the single dice in certain situations made the game very random and the factors that influenced the single dice roll were not able to provide a feeling that you had control over the outcome e.g. It felt like pot luck every roll. I suppose some people like a totally random result but I prefer a better level of influence with 2D6.
If you ever wanted to explore why 2d6 is so good, give the boardgame "Settlers of Catan" a go. It is one of the all-time great classic board games and it is built around the probability of 2D6. Fantastic game to play with friends or family if you ever get a chance.
However I can see why you would want a single dice. It makes for less rolling but unfortunately does not fit the plans for Gruntz.
Another thought today would a table with the options for a defending unit based on status help to summarise the assault sequence. What I mean is Unit Status Overwatch Options React fire or react attack with all non waxed models. Unit Status Not in overwatch and not suppressed. Mental test +1 to react fire or react attack with half of non waxed models rounding up. Unit Status Suppressed. No reaction allowed.
Hope I got that right, no doubt wording could be tidied up.
Last Edit: May 6, 2012 10:13:35 GMT -5 by timsnoddy