|
Post by mango on Oct 29, 2012 3:51:22 GMT -5
Hello, I played a couple of games today and I felt that the soldiers of the Gruntz universe seem to be a bunch of sissies I might have this wrong (please correct me if I am) but here goes. This is what the Mental stat is listed as 4 - Green 5 - Trained 6 - Seasoned 7 - Veteran 8 - Expert 9 - Elite Now imagine that an assault has taken place and our side had more waxed and then must past a Mental test at +2 to stay in place (and be supressed) So taking the above, this is the % chance of passing the test 4 - Green - 2.8% 5 - Trained - 8.33% 6 - Seasoned - 16.66% 7 - Veteran - 27.7% 8 - Expert - 41.66% 9 - Elite - 58.33% So trained soldiers would flee 92% of the time? veteran soldiers 72% of the time, the elite, the best of the best, the highest stat available would flee 42% of the time? seems odd. Now consider this roll is the same if both sides have equal wax (or no wax at all) So take your 8 man elite squad gets attacked on the flank by the lone survivor of a squad he misses, lets presume we dont attack back or miss and then 42% of the time your squad would flee, if you pass then (by the 1.1 draft) you are supressed and therefore cant charge (takes 2 actions). I dont think those sorts of % really represent the tenacity of soldiers in a hth combat situation where if Barry dies on the flank they arnt even going to realize he is dead in the mayhem of combat - Just my thoughts, I may have read it all wrong Point 2 - React Fire/React Attack (or Argggg I'm useless)The chances of being able to react to an enemy charging your unit is as follows: 4 - Green - 8.33% 5 - Trained - 16.66% 6 - Seasoned - 27.7% 7 - Veteran - 41.66% 8 - Expert - 58.33% 9 - Elite - 72.22% Once again unless you are Veteran or higher your chances are extremely low due to the bell curve of the 2d6. I understand that there are alot of scenarios where the enemy can jump out and suprise a unit (and therefore not have a reaction) but in the couple of games we played today the unit that is charging is usually the one that just got shot at by the charged unit in the previous turn so its a little like this: warning - could cause laughter www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uvm3GixEj4It seems that you have to go to the extreme with this stat to have any impact at all. I understand that many have different perspectives on what scores should be called but really these are way off, could I suggest: 4 - Brain Dead 5 - Drunk 6 - Just Woke Up 7 - Trained 8 - Veteran 9 - Elite Just some thoughts from a busy mind
|
|
|
Post by mango on Oct 29, 2012 4:11:16 GMT -5
Some other questions about React Fire.
1.1 Draft says:
Before movement the defender target may react fire at attacker
a - What happens if the attacker cannot be seen before they move? or if they are in heavy cover (can I wait until they are in the open)
b - I mentioned above but when passing the Mental test you are supressed (update draft 1.1 left column 2nd last paragraph) then how do you "at the next activation they may either make an assault attack". Or is the supression bit on a passed test in error? (because it says on p19 of the rulebook that assault cannot cause supression?)
|
|
|
Post by inrepose on Nov 1, 2012 4:35:14 GMT -5
There are a few reasons for the Mental stats being as they are. Firstly unlike games like 40K, the Condition Brown is more of a "degrading" situation and is not as likely to cause issues with repeat running to the edge of the table. I wanted it to work more like a recoil to push the unit back by a run move and recover from it after the move, rather than having to test again to rally the group. The second reason is good use of Commanders because if placed correctly to support squads they provide a deferential by allowing the squads to use his Mental stat while in range. I know the future battlefield is supposed to be all about remote communication but I do think having a local command presence will boost the control and organisation of a unit. So making use of a commander or sub-commander will provide good support to squads when they have a low Mental stat. So essentially it is not a major failure of the squad if they don't pass a Mental test at half strength, it is instead more of a push-back and recoil rule. This is in line with the general degrading of quality and unit function seen across the Gruntz game. Vehicles and squads degrade in quality and function as they fight in a simple way that is relatively easy to track with damage etc. Finally you only make the test at half strength from shooting and during most games this is not always immediate unless you are facing overwhelming incoming fire at an early stage. However switching to Assault it does get more deadly and this was deliberate again. Going tooth and nail in Gruntz was designed to be the last resort of a trained squad with modern ranged weapons. It does make it a challenge for Aliens but overwhelming numbers like those seen in Starship Troopers can eventually overrun units with ranged weapons. Also throw in a few Tank Bug sized models. Also Mango - Did I send you a copy of the 1.1 draft? I can't remember sharing it with you and when did you get the copy? Was it shared with you? Just hoping I have not stumbled upon a copy being shared on the web.
|
|
|
Post by inrepose on Nov 1, 2012 5:00:49 GMT -5
Ok just realised you are a friend of Two Guns Blazing and have been trying the rules. So thanks for the feedback.
|
|
|
Post by twogunsblazing on Nov 1, 2012 6:00:55 GMT -5
Thanks for explaining the thoughts behind the mental checks Robin! Ooh, what's that over there...(squints eyes)...it looks like a thread about vehicle assaults and ramming
|
|
|
Post by mango on Nov 1, 2012 8:42:29 GMT -5
Thanks for your reply, I wasnt concerned about shooting because 50% cas before a test is quite significant and troops may fall back to move out of action solders back to get medivac'd out etc. However switching to Assault it does get more deadly and this was deliberate again. Going tooth and nail in Gruntz was designed to be the last resort of a trained squad with modern ranged weapons. It does make it a challenge for Aliens but overwhelming numbers like those seen in Starship Troopers can eventually overrun units with ranged weapons. Also throw in a few Tank Bug sized models. My main concern is HTH. In some ways it isnt that deadly at all and as my example where a solitary figure from a squad assaults another squad, 1 model in base to base combat with 1 model can easily result in a draw causing a full squad of troops to fall back due to a lone soldier charging them. I understand that there has to be a balance in any ruleset of how many rules you have vs faster play. In previous editions of 40k for example you had the outnumber rule which gave a squad an advantage through strength of numbers over a lesser numbered enemy. Or models within a certain distance got to fight to represent a 'swirling melee' After playing a few assaults vs 2guns hth gruntz it was so lopsided it was just silly. This happened for a couple of reasons 1 - my troops didnt get to fight back at all due to not passing reaction tests. So in this melee only 1 side is fighting and the other side standing there doing nothing 2 - Based on 1, my troops are going to have to test every time, because the best i could hope for was a draw, so my enemy had another round of attacks against my troops as they fell back (which happens most of the time ref the % in OP). Overall his initial round of combat only killed 2-3 models when assaulting with large squads so that wasnt really overwhelming, it was that combined with 1 and 2 above which made assualt completely 1 sided which I really dont understand at all. When you consider tropps fighting behind a barricade or in cover have a huge advantage in hth but still dont even get an attack and (effectively) auto flee even when they didnt even take a single casualty?. A couple of times it was 1 or 2 models charging my 8 man squads, drawing with no damage and I was the one fleeing after not even swinging a bayonet in anger. Overall I cannot fathom how troops engaged in this 'deadly whirlwind of combat' can never deal any damage Also just noted another question. On a draw result both combatants must test to flee, is both flee do both get fell attack on the other? no attacks happen? or does one side flee before the other?
|
|
|
Post by twogunsblazing on Nov 1, 2012 8:54:09 GMT -5
That's a good question about getting free attacks when both sides fail their condition brown check and disengage from an assault.
In regards to draws in close combat. I think in our games mango, there was a very specific circumstance which came into play that helped skew the results in my favour, and that is the army special rule I was using to represent the Aliens complete lack of fear, which is where they auto pass mental checks. If I were using other troop types, perhaps with me being forced to take mental checks as well, in the instances where it was a draw, I would be just as at risk as you to suffer a condition brown failure...
|
|
|
Post by timsnoddy on Nov 1, 2012 12:36:36 GMT -5
I think if you are playing the 1.1 assault rules you have got to play overwatch. Any unit which thinks it is about to be assaulted should go into overwatch giving an automatic chance to fire at full effect before the assaulting unit engages.
|
|
|
Post by twogunsblazing on Nov 1, 2012 18:48:06 GMT -5
Overwatch is good when it comes to react fire because you auto pass the roll to see if you shoot and you shoot with your entire squad as opposed to half of it...and if you are about to be charged, this is a very desirable situation to be in.
However, is going into overwatch if you suspect you are about to be charged a good idea?
To go into overwatch, you expend both your actions for the chance of a single shoot action at the soon-to-be-charging-you squad when they do charge you. Wouldn't it be better to not go on overwatch and instead, spend those two actions moving and shooting (or shooting and moving if you are playing the optional rules), and then also get a chance at having another shot at half strength when they do charge you...that way you get at least a single shoot action in and quite possibly one and a half shoot actions, which is at least but possibly more than just the single shoot action overwatch would give you.
This is further enhanced if your defending squad has the let rip perk (which I think some of mango's squads had). That way you get two shoot actions with the chance of two and a half shoot action as opposed to the single shoot action overwatch would give you.
Still, other factors come into play here like the modifiers for range, the chance of losing overwatch if you become suppressed before being charged, thereby effectively losing your overwatch benefit, etc, etc. In terms of being charged in close combat, I don't think overwatch is always the best deliberate course of action to take, however if you just happen to find yourself on overwatch when being charged, it is certainly a better position to be in that not being on overwatch...
|
|
|
Post by inrepose on Nov 2, 2012 3:48:21 GMT -5
Overwatch is good if you think you are going to be assaulted, giving the unit the highest rate of survival. This certainly is the case if you are holding an objective and want to stay in place. However it might also be better to simply continue to suppress an attacker and shoot first.
If however, you are on a flank, and not well supported and the attacking squad(s) are well supported with a Commander it might be better to pick Overwatch. Even if you were able to hit and suppress an enemy squad it is likely that on their activation they will use their commander to "Take the Pain", removing the suppression from their gruntz squad before then Assaulting your squad.
Suppression and the resulting requirement to use an action to remove it is core to the game. If you remove the need to use an action to remove suppression from the game it would unbalance things a because you can't pin the opponent down by reducing their movement. I realised that some of the Perkz which were all about ignoring suppression were a little overpowered and they have been tweaked a bit.
You can't use let rip when assaulted i.e you could only respond to an assault with a single shoot, but you probably played it like that anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Ben on Nov 2, 2012 4:00:50 GMT -5
Thanks for this, I'm stumped. In any game of miniatures HtH phase is important, even in a game centered on shooting. The feedback presented is very interesting but alarming. Go read months ago, not with the game ready for printing. Personally I hope that over the past year the game has been tested and evolved from players like mango rather than modelling freaks. I hope to see a good game without sensational bugs! Ben
|
|
|
Post by twogunsblazing on Nov 2, 2012 6:59:09 GMT -5
You can't use let rip when assaulted i.e you could only respond to an assault with a single shoot, but you probably played it like that anyway. Yeah, we were only having a single shoot action for the react fire. When I mentioned the 'Let Rip' perk above, I was highlighting that if you had that perk, and you chose to double shoot during your turn instead of using your two action to go on overwatch, you would effectively get 2 x full squad shoots and possibly 1 x half squad shoots at the unit you suspected of charging you next turn, as opposed to the 1 x full squad shoot the overwatch would allow you. The chances of killing more of that charging squad before they reach you seems to be greater by choosing to shoot with your actions rather than using them to go on overwatch...the end result seemingly less casualties inflicted upon you and more chance of surviving the assault.
|
|
|
Post by timsnoddy on Nov 2, 2012 12:39:52 GMT -5
There are a lot of variables in this. Perks and the type of assaulting attacker all make a difference.
If the likely assaulters don't have a perk allowing them to charge with one action and no commander nearby yes I think I would try and shoot as many squads suppressed as possible thus preventing them assaulting. Definitely more likely to do this if the assaulter's side also has shooting units which can suppress the squad I am thinking of going into overwatch with.
My understanding is assaults would happen one at a time. So if a squad of marines in overwatch was faced with six squads of assaulty but not shooty bugs it would get to fire at full effect six times if six assaults were made on it.
If the defending unit has a commander it may get the chance to come out of suppression before it gets assaulted. It also depends a bit on the mental stat of the unit being assaulted. A low stat would influence me towards going into overwatch rather than a test I am likely to fail.
As I say a million variables and to me one of the things that makes Gruntz interesting is there are always tactical options and not just one blatantly obvious thing to do.
|
|
|
Post by twogunsblazing on Nov 2, 2012 18:37:45 GMT -5
There are a lot of variables in this. Perks and the type of assaulting attacker all make a difference. If the likely assaulters don't have a perk allowing them to charge with one action and no commander nearby yes I think I would try and shoot as many squads suppressed as possible thus preventing them assaulting. Definitely more likely to do this if the assaulter's side also has shooting units which can suppress the squad I am thinking of going into overwatch with. My understanding is assaults would happen one at a time. So if a squad of marines in overwatch was faced with six squads of assaulty but not shooty bugs it would get to fire at full effect six times if six assaults were made on it. If the defending unit has a commander it may get the chance to come out of suppression before it gets assaulted. It also depends a bit on the mental stat of the unit being assaulted. A low stat would influence me towards going into overwatch rather than a test I am likely to fail. As I say a million variables and to me one of the things that makes Gruntz interesting is there are always tactical options and not just one blatantly obvious thing to do. You're right, there are a lot of variables and factors involved in the decision, and having all those variables and having to make the choice of what to do is indeed one of the things that makes a game very enjoyable.
|
|
|
Post by mango on Nov 2, 2012 20:11:39 GMT -5
In regards to draws in close combat. I think in our games mango, there was a very specific circumstance which came into play that helped skew the results in my favour, and that is the army special rule I was using to represent the Aliens complete lack of fear, which is where they auto pass mental checks. Thats true, but to me it is a sideline concern. During most combat you didnt have to pass a mental check due to my army not fighting back at all in combat. The main concern is the method of close combat. One way I thought of last night to explain it is Shooting If my squad is shooting and there are 2 people standing side by side. One of those models is olympic champion shooter, the other has never held a gun before. My squads chance of hitting either are the same, because shooting at a target isnt an action that is effected by the skill of the target Hand To Hand If my squad is charging 2 models side by side and one has the hth skills of an olympic level fencer and using the best hth weapon in the game and the other is non skilled civillian with his fists. My squads chance of hitting them should differ because HTH is an opposed action. The target is actively going to attempt to defend himself from the attack. Currently it doesnt matter if you are attacking one or the other, neither get to harm you (unless they pass a low% roll) and neithers skill nor weapons affect your chance of killing them at all.
|
|