|
Post by raceygaming on Jan 4, 2017 14:18:12 GMT -5
looks like an interesting scenario for sure but the ignores cover is going to be difficult to determine for sure. The fast and quick way that we were using was if you are in area terrian like forest, ruins etc you take your cover as normal. If the center of the template lands on one side of the defense wall people on the other side have cover. the only question this brought up was hitting a knight with Ion shield. since barrage hits side armor we rolled vs its AV 12 side BUT the template hole was in front of the knight when it landed so we gave it its shield to the front and the hole was in the front arc. as it had the sheild already up from the first turn. this was 2nd turn S9 ap 2 one.
|
|
|
Post by voodoo on Jan 4, 2017 14:47:39 GMT -5
That’s the way I’d have argued for it to be ruled. If the blast lands on the facing with the shield it gets a save despite the blast rolling to pen vs. the side armor value.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jan 4, 2017 14:54:27 GMT -5
How it would be ruled at the tournament is that the facing of the shield works if the hole of the blast marker hits that side. It's falling from the skies, so the position of impact is where the hole is. Ergo, that's determining the shield facing.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jan 5, 2017 9:31:17 GMT -5
Here is the third brand new mission for this year - Subterranean Assault!
|
|
|
Post by voodoo on Jan 5, 2017 11:28:17 GMT -5
I’ve got a few questions regarding Subterranean Assault.
1. What is the terrain going to look like? Will it be an “open” board or is it going to be a rat maze of tunnels and walls? 2. What was the thinking behind the deployment zone sizes? As designed the deployment zones shown only account for 29% of the area of a regular deployment zone. Horde armies will be hobbled by this mission right from deployment unless there’s so much LoS blocking terrain that their opponent won’t have a clear shot T1. 3. Price of failure “You have units in your deployment zone at the end of the game” will fortifications count towards this? 4. Price of failure “You lost a super-heavy vehicle or GMC during the course of the game” seems an unfairly targeted price of failure; as if your opponent does not have one then you’re again, at a disadvantage 5. Secondary Objective “Didn’t damage or lose any flyers” this is an echo to the terrain and seems abnormally punishing to a single unit type. Not only are flyers called out for some pretty harsh rules for their arrival, they also can’t ever flub a dangerous terrain roll or you’ve given up max points 6. Secondary Objective “If at least 1 model from one of your units is In your opponent’s Deployment zone and less than 1” from the table edge.” – Propose changing it to just having a model in deployment zones. They’re tiny enough as it is, armies that aren’t extremely mobile will never make it across the board to be within an inch of an opposing board edge. Especially if you only go to turn 3. 7. The reserves rolls also gimp Genestealer cults as their Subterranean Assault (main reason for them living and working as an army) is completely subverted by the Close Quarters rule.
Just off hand it looks like the author really hates both flyers and GMC’s/SHV’s and plays a highly mobile army.
|
|
|
Post by cmcd on Jan 5, 2017 12:22:22 GMT -5
Updated Echoes of Prospero - new mission for this year.
Question. If a unit that does not have a psyker and gains a mastery level. What powers does that unit gain?
|
|
|
Post by voodoo on Jan 5, 2017 12:54:02 GMT -5
Question. If a unit that does not have a psyker and gains a mastery level. What powers does that unit gain? Non-psykers during playtesting weren’t given any powers, if a non-psyker rolls a 6 you just gained +1 die to your pool to Deny the Witch or cast with an existing psyker in your army. Existing psykers don’t gain a new spell either, they just increase their battery size.
|
|
|
Post by danny1995 on Jan 5, 2017 13:10:25 GMT -5
Is it also assumed then that th Mastery level helps with your bonus to deny for when that unit is targeted?
|
|
|
Post by voodoo on Jan 5, 2017 13:19:20 GMT -5
I guess then yes it would, you’d have a 5+ deny unless the model that activated it was already a psyker in which case their deny might go up one step depending on the level of psyker that was targeting the unit.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jan 5, 2017 13:55:52 GMT -5
I’ve got a few questions regarding Subterranean Assault. 1. What is the terrain going to look like? Will it be an “open” board or is it going to be a rat maze of tunnels and walls? 2. What was the thinking behind the deployment zone sizes? As designed the deployment zones shown only account for 29% of the area of a regular deployment zone. Horde armies will be hobbled by this mission right from deployment unless there’s so much LoS blocking terrain that their opponent won’t have a clear shot T1. 3. Price of failure “You have units in your deployment zone at the end of the game” will fortifications count towards this? 4. Price of failure “You lost a super-heavy vehicle or GMC during the course of the game” seems an unfairly targeted price of failure; as if your opponent does not have one then you’re again, at a disadvantage 5. Secondary Objective “Didn’t damage or lose any flyers” this is an echo to the terrain and seems abnormally punishing to a single unit type. Not only are flyers called out for some pretty harsh rules for their arrival, they also can’t ever flub a dangerous terrain roll or you’ve given up max points 6. Secondary Objective “If at least 1 model from one of your units is In your opponent’s Deployment zone and less than 1” from the table edge.” – Propose changing it to just having a model in deployment zones. They’re tiny enough as it is, armies that aren’t extremely mobile will never make it across the board to be within an inch of an opposing board edge. Especially if you only go to turn 3. 7. The reserves rolls also gimp Genestealer cults as their Subterranean Assault (main reason for them living and working as an army) is completely subverted by the Close Quarters rule. Just off hand it looks like the author really hates both flyers and GMC’s/SHV’s and plays a highly mobile army.
lol... no, I'm not the author Matt.....
1. not sure what the terrain will look like - depends on how many tables I have to set up (thus far there's only 11 people attending after all ) and what is available. I'm thinking thematically this would be fairly terrain dense if it can be done 2. unsure why small deployment zones (again not the author) but that's why it's posted up for playtesting to see if it needs to change 3. no 4. agreed 5. also agree 6. sounds fair 7. cult ambush isn't affected... it's a special rule which is for infiltrating, it takes the place of ongoing reserves entering play.
|
|
|
Post by cmcd on Jan 5, 2017 14:24:09 GMT -5
I’ve got a few questions regarding Subterranean Assault. 1. What is the terrain going to look like? Will it be an “open” board or is it going to be a rat maze of tunnels and walls? 2. What was the thinking behind the deployment zone sizes? As designed the deployment zones shown only account for 29% of the area of a regular deployment zone. Horde armies will be hobbled by this mission right from deployment unless there’s so much LoS blocking terrain that their opponent won’t have a clear shot T1. 3. Price of failure “You have units in your deployment zone at the end of the game” will fortifications count towards this? 4. Price of failure “You lost a super-heavy vehicle or GMC during the course of the game” seems an unfairly targeted price of failure; as if your opponent does not have one then you’re again, at a disadvantage 5. Secondary Objective “Didn’t damage or lose any flyers” this is an echo to the terrain and seems abnormally punishing to a single unit type. Not only are flyers called out for some pretty harsh rules for their arrival, they also can’t ever flub a dangerous terrain roll or you’ve given up max points 6. Secondary Objective “If at least 1 model from one of your units is In your opponent’s Deployment zone and less than 1” from the table edge.” – Propose changing it to just having a model in deployment zones. They’re tiny enough as it is, armies that aren’t extremely mobile will never make it across the board to be within an inch of an opposing board edge. Especially if you only go to turn 3. 7. The reserves rolls also gimp Genestealer cults as their Subterranean Assault (main reason for them living and working as an army) is completely subverted by the Close Quarters rule. Just off hand it looks like the author really hates both flyers and GMC’s/SHV’s and plays a highly mobile army. Yeah I hate Flyer's, F#$@ those guys... Not really. Ill put some justification on here for you to ease your thoughts. All about concept and how to describe it on the field of battle. 1. Terrain. Terrain will likely be a random determine number (pre Tournament) of stalagmite growing up from the ground, and stalactite coming down. They will be sparce and impassible terrain. They are rock formations. Your Warlord does not want to destroy them in case the ceiling collapses on your forces. 2. Deployment Zones. The concept is that your forces are coming out of tunnels and into a large cavern. If a standard unit only moves 6" and runs on average 3-4" , 9" radius would be the size of 1 game turns of moving before in the cross-hairs of the enemy. The corridors are only so tight. You can only fit X number of units in them. Hence *Marching Formation . Going to do some Play testing with this on the weekend with Shannon. If we feel that the deployment size is too small. We'll bump it up to 12". I am starting to feel that the deployment zones are already too small. Thanks for that point. 3. Fortifications. No. Will amend to the mission. Good point. In fact, thinking about it. Fortifications will need a larger deployment zone. most likely add a rule to allow you to set up your fortification in a modified table quarter to simulate that the building has been there for some time. and that your making use of it once your forces have arrived. 4. Yep. . Life sucks. There are three ways of looking at this. 1. Super heavy vehicles (SHV) and Gargantuan Monstrous Creatures (GMC) are Rare assets. If you loose one it is going to hurt your chances of crushing the enemy when you come out of the ground. Hence -1 to your points. I'm sure you (royal you) can find a way to keep your valuable asset safe. Especially since *Eye in the sky prevents units from Deep striking in and popping your SHV. 2. If your opponent does not have a SHV or GMC and you do. I like to think its already unfair. If you and your opponent both have SHV or GMC its equal your both going to try and protect your assets. If neither of you have any. You don't have to worry about gaining -1 from the price of failure points. 3. War ain't fair. 5. Flyers, flying underground sounds safe. Even the millennium falcon looses a few hull points when flying through tight spaces. Guess you will be flying pretty slow. I would even Hover vice flying. Or deepstrike. Point taken though, will find a way to amend rule to prevent not getting max points from a 17% dice roll. per flyer. (1 in 6). Most flyers this wont affect since you can change flight modes. But thinking about it. some flyers are always Supersonic, ie. Necrons. Ill add it to my play test list. Again awesome point. 6. The Idea about this is to be so far up the enemy's line that you get a bonus point. This Primary mission isn't about holding an objective. its pushing an enemy back. and if you can push an enemy back to the point of having your units along there deployment side. you could either barricade the wall to prevent them from coming any closer or control it to come up into the enemy's rear line, and that is a +1 advantage. Ending games on turn 3. it happens. But I think that this mission will prevent people from making turns go long. 2.5 hours is a long time. Also making your mission to be in your enemy's deployment zone forces you to speed up your turns. and use tactics other than Hunker and shoot. The idea of changing it to be in their deployment zone vice at the back line of their deployment zone, I'm not for. Ill think about this. and see how the play testing goes. I might change it so that the distance is greater. 3" from the edge ect. 7. Genestealer Cults. hmm... Cult Ambush. the only issue with Cult ambush is a roll of 2. Which is basically Outflank. Perhaps you (royal you again) have sent units on a small but separate tunnel which pops out in this cavern. It's a good point I should add something about Outflank into the rules. I don't think it gimps Genestealer cults at all, if anything it gives them a slight advantage, to cross the table. As you said. this is their army. It's where they live. Ongoing reserve is not reserve. Even their rule Return to the shadows. helps them out. If you are further than 6" from an enemy model you can be put into ongoing reserve. then deploy again via Cult Ambush. Cult Ambush is not Deep strike. so. you can set up as per the dice roll you make. if you roll a 1. Your coming through your tunnel ie your deployment zone. Infiltrate and scout is still a thing in this mission. Great Points Matt. Ill talk to Shannon during the week and try and update some of these rules. Im sure play testing on Saturday will help out a lot.
|
|
|
Post by cmcd on Jan 5, 2017 14:46:06 GMT -5
Messing around with Deployment Zone sizes Will bump it up to 12 Radius. That gives people just over 24 inches to cross from closest point to closet point. Updating sheet now.
|
|
|
Post by voodoo on Jan 5, 2017 15:37:06 GMT -5
Sorry about the confusion on Subterranean Assault. I thought it was just a special way to arrive from reserves which would force them to show up in their own deployment zone because of the wording in Close Quarters.
Close Quarters. Both side’s Reserves must enter play through the tunnel markers on their side of the table. Measure the units first move from the Marker
Also, changing them to 12” radius (~600mm dia) ups you to 52% of a Vanguard deployment (as shown on the accompanying photo). Also, I’m not slow at work today at all… nope, super busy…
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jan 5, 2017 15:54:36 GMT -5
to be fair, it is not unheard of for a mission at club champs to not allow someone to deploy their entire army.
|
|
|
Post by voodoo on Jan 5, 2017 16:22:28 GMT -5
to be fair, it is not unheard of for a mission at club champs to not allow someone to deploy their entire army. True, but not normally for lack of space in a deployment zone.
|
|