Welcome to the new Majestic Twelve Games Forum!

2007-01-06 22:39:01

One moment, I think I misunderstand something.

Let make an example:

Unit A : 8)
Unit B : :twisted:

Starting position:

8) 8) 8) 8)

:twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

Final Position:

8) 8) 8) 8) :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

Now, how we come at this?

1) Unit B take a Charge order, move to the left, wheel and then contact to the flank.

2) Unit B take a move order, move to the left. Unit B take charge order and charge the flank.

If we speaking about case 1 I think is too easy get flank bonus, is we speaking about case 2 so I absolutely have no objection, is exactly the way I like.

I hope it's clear.

2007-01-06 20:00:06

All the follow is strictly IMHO :wink:

The fact for me is that moving versus a flank or rear thanks to high movement alone isn't a tactics, is cheesy. After all with the command points system isn't so hard take a flank, only if you start from the front you should first move to a flank and then charge.

I mean, take the flank or the rear should be a rewarding action, not only in games, but something planned and accomplished by manouvering all your units. Taking the flank of your enemies should be something that made you proud of it, not only a matter of movement points.

Well, beside this is an uncommn evenience that you have so much movement point to do so, if you feel this as an unnecessary restriction I'll try without it and let you know.

There are other issue?

2007-01-05 21:55:57

I'm happy to be useful

I don't understand "pillbugs" how fit in this, but I'm sure there is a logical explanation

For contact, I mean even not in ZOC. I know that is restrictive, but the aim is that you should struggle to get the flank or the rear, not simply benefit from an high movement.

Of course if you are already engaged when you reform you can place unengaged elements in flank rear/position if you can.

2007-01-04 19:40:41

Hi to all!! Here are the rule we use for our games, there is some litte change from the "official" rules, please let us know what you think about:

------------------------------------------------------------

The General Rule: if you like you can skip all of this and use only this: 1 hex = 1 inch. This is the very core of the hexless rules, all other thing are useful but not necessary. If you use small figure (10-6 mm) you can consider use the 1 hex = 1 cm convention, as long as all players agrees there is no problem.

Basing and Flanks : since we use the miniature from GW's Lord of the Ring range, we use 50mm square bases as element bases, with 3-4 figure if infantry, 2 if cavalry, 1 if others. If you use the warmaster or DBA bases there is a little reduction of front, so it doesn't really matter as long as all player use the same bases.

Zone of Control: elements have a zoc wide as they're bases, and deep 2”. This is an exception to the General Rule, but we find that 1” zoc is too easy to avoid.

Unit Cohesion and Formation

Regular Formation
A unit is in Regular Formation if all of the following apply:
All Elements in the unit are facing the same direction.
Two flank corners of each element in each rank touch two flank corners of at least one other element in that rank
There is a front rank of at least two Elements, aligned perpendicularly to the unit's facing.
All ranks (except the last) contain the same number of Elements.
The two front corners of all Elements in the second and subsequent ranks touch the two rear corners of one Element in the preceding rank.
There are no gaps in any rank except the last.

In other words, the unit makes a “block” of elements with no gaps in the ranks except for the last rank.

Column Formation
Each Rank has one element, either
One left corner of all Elements in the second and subsequent ranks touches the left half of the rear flank of the Element in front of it.
or
One right corner of all Elements in the second and subsequent ranks touches the right half of the rear flank of the Element in front of it.

A unit consisting of one Element is always considered to be in Regular Formation.

Movement
All movement are unit-based. An unit can go forward for his movement allowance without other rules.
Wheel
Wheeling is a dire affair, we use this convention:
An unit wheels on the center of the unit. Each 45° of rotation has a fixed cost in movement allowance, depending on the unit longest side (not necessary the front). We state that the cost is equal to half the number of bases rounded up. For example, a 4x3 unit will pay 4/2=2 inch to make a 1° to 45° wheel. A long unit, for example 3x8 or a column count the longest side, so in this casa 8 bases (so wheeling costs 4 inch).
In this manner we speed up a little since we need not to make curves misuration.

Difficult Terrain
We state that a player must pay the penalty for the difficult terrain for the whole unit.

Combat
We make some little modification:

1: When elements came into contact they must align themselves, the contacting unit must move in order to contact the more enemy possible.
2: You cannot contact a side of enemy base if you were not in the same side at the start of your activation. In other word, ff you are in the front arc of a unit you cannot charge the flank, even if you have enough movement to do so.

When not stated different us the General Rule. And Common Sense.
------------------------------------------------------------

2006-11-14 19:31:48

Well, this is an hard question.

A single monster is "easy" killed by various low troop. I mean, the nastiest monster have 3 attack, that at best hit at 50%, so to kill one unit (3 wound) must wait 2 turn.

Four 2 attack element can do 2 (front) + 6 (flanks) + 4 (rear) = 12 attacks... so there is loss of wound every turn, depending on monster defense. Now, the monster can kill some element, but in the long run is overthrow.

On the other side there is the monsters with low defense, a bunch of wounds and stats not so brillant. Since they have no morale they are very underpriced, so you can put a lot of them, taking the number disadvantage from a better point of view.

My 0,02 cents

2006-11-09 23:07:27

I'm sorry, I was out for a while and did'nt see this :oops:

To make a long story short, take the rules and wheter you see 1 hex read 1 inch.

There is much more to say, but this is the very basics, I wish to make a 3d to talk about a full hexless way to play.

2006-10-16 18:06:45

Taltos wrote:

Zerloon wrote:
Taltos wrote:
Drain (4 – Ca): 4 Me for draining 1 me? And 2 more for 1? IMHO is too costly, maybe 4 for 1d4 is more in line.
Hhmmm, it has not come up in play enough for me to have a good answer to this one. Thoughts Jim?
A 2d6 mage have 7 ME, more or less... so using 6 point you can "cancel" 2 point... spending 8 me cancel 4, 12 me cancel 5 point... ok, you may hamper the opponent mage, but you must use a mage only for this... it's like warhammer scroll keepers, mage that not cast but only carries dispel scroll... IMHO is not very good.
The trick is the range restriction inherent in the FtM magic system. I have not played GW stuff, but my understanding is that range on the counter efforts is not a factor. Here, the targeted mage must be within spell distance. That can be quite a feat with armies in the way.

Well, this is another good point for reducing the cost... I should come whithin 8 hex (and you said this isn't easy) and must give up all my magic point to remove a mere fraction of opponents mp?

2006-10-15 18:20:30

Taltos wrote:

Feel free to do so for your group. But the desired power of my skeletons may not match yours, so we were loathe to dictate. The strength of the system is flexibility, and I would hate to undercut that.

I see your point, I agree.

Taltos wrote:

Drain (4 – Ca): 4 Me for draining 1 me? And 2 more for 1? IMHO is too costly, maybe 4 for 1d4 is more in line.
Hhmmm, it has not come up in play enough for me to have a good answer to this one. Thoughts Jim?

A 2d6 mage have 7 ME, more or less... so using 6 point you can "cancel" 2 point... spending 8 me cancel 4, 12 me cancel 5 point... ok, you may hamper the opponent mage, but you must use a mage only for this... it's like warhammer scroll keepers, mage that not cast but only carries dispel scroll... IMHO is not very good.

Taltos wrote:

Holy Fire and Rancor are the exact opposite of each other - same die shift affect. I do not see the issue you are indicating.

Holy fire raise one the die type when attacking undead.
Rancor raise one the die type when attacking.
Both cost the same.

I can suppose that since Holy Fire is Assurance and Rancor is Quietus then there is a fluff balance... but imho fluff should not take into mechanics.

2006-10-13 22:56:36

And now, time is come for the spell factor :twisted: :

Animate (3 – Qu): I suggest to make a "standard" skeleton/zombies stats, and apply them for all animated troop. Is simpler, avoid confusione between piece, and give a precise effect.

Apply Special (Varies – As, Ca, Cy, Qu): I don't understand this passage:
"The cost for this factor is the same as the cost for the special being applied. Round up in the event that a special has a fractional cost. No special may cost less than one full point."

Change Terrain (3 – Cy) : I think that should be forbidden "change terrain" in the middle of a unit. This phrases "Element that finds itself in Impassable terrain is unable to move." mean that with only 3 ME I can effectly block a unit for the game... not fair I think.

Despair (4 – Ca, Qu): I think this should be a 5 point effect.

Drain (4 – Ca): 4 Me for draining 1 me? And 2 more for 1? IMHO is too costly, maybe 4 for 1d4 is more in line.

Holy Fire (4 – As): should cost less or be more effective. For the same point you get Rancor, that have the same effect but on all target...

Protect (3 – Cy): I think the target hex should become also impassable, or maybe you can't shoot througt it. Otherwise Shield is much way better.

Wasting (4 – Qu): I think this should be a 5 point effect.

2006-10-11 21:46:50

THe connection is that people might expect "heroes" in FtM to be like heroes in many other systems. We did not set out to write a heroic mass combat game, so havig a single guy be able to destroy an army will just plain not work.

Again I don't understand how this is related with skill cost... but indeed I must disagree. Your Hero are very big fellow, with so many wounds and high defense they can beat to sand much of ordinary guy over there... Keeping the example of Aragorn, in my LoTR setting he have more or less the stats of one of your boreal hero, and IMHO he IS powerful... I think captains should,nt have stat higher than troop, the added command dice should be enough. Frankly speaking in a mass combat I find very odd that a single commander can do the mayhem they do where launched in the fray...

You know, you CAN take feeble, undisciplined, slow-moving but you'll have a really easy unit to kill.
Try it out sometime. If it follows our playtest, then you'll find yourself with a really cheap, crappy army that is highly ineffective
But they're cheap!

There is a little misundestood I think. 8)

I'm not speaking of an army, I'm speaking of units not designed for hand to hand combat, but with other role, that they perform very well (maybe shooting, or maybe stopping people) at low cost since they have ability that theorically should hamper them, but in pratical have little or not effect...

Take Hesitant as example: I have archer with 2d4 melee and 2d8 range... Why should I charge? I'll shoot, and when my enemy charge I'll shoot again, counter attack is not a valid options, IMHO...

2006-10-11 20:38:24

Keep whichever ones you want, I'm just giving siggestions to those afraid a .75 modifier will "cheese" up the arty too much.

a .75 is not cheese, more .75, coupled wit .50 and .25 is cheese :twisted:

With the prevalence of "heroic" mass combat systems, people sometimes think. "I've got Aragorn on my side I should be able to kill everything you have with one guy. Well, that's unrealistic even for a fantasy game

I beg for pardon... but what's the point? I don't see the connection... :?:

2006-10-09 19:42:41

Of course you can, just to wait we finish playtest it. 8)

2006-10-09 19:40:45

1-2) My purpose is to point the difference between an infantry or a monster, if as you say units of monster have morale then there is no problem. Of course, a lone monster cost 200 and the same in pack cost 500 IS a bit odd...

3) Forgot Rabble?

4) Ooooook, no more math pls Only a questions, you have calculated with 3+def or half dice + def? I think 3+def, so you have technically cheated :wink:

So long, go ahead, this is my impression on skill:

Cause Fear: (1.25) I'll raise this to 1.50, see Fearless for more arguments.

Fearless: (1.5) I wonder why this cost more than cause fear, this skill work only if there is units with fear, fear works ever. I suggest to low this to 1.25.

Forester: (2) I will lower to 1.5, is much more specialized than ignore terrain.

Hesitant: (0.5) I will raise to 0.75, after all who get hesitant? Archer, Artillery (no more) and other people you don't really want to send in the fray... so in effect is'nt a big disadvantage.

Horror: (1.5) Only .25 more than cause fear? I mean, if you fail a morale test an element is gone right? I'll rise this to 2

Impetuous: (.75) This is odd. An impetuous unit is a unit you normally wish charging, so I don't see this much as a disadvantage...

Rabble: (.25) : I dislike this ability soooo much. If you give this you have a low cost immobile... fire platform? Wall of flesh? I mean, it is an easy discount for artillery and archers, and this is bad. If don't removed at all at least forbidden to unit with ranged attack, and raised to .50

Reckless: (.75) Nothing to say. At least nothing more already said, with 3+defense is good as it is.

Regeneration: (4) Maybe some bad feelings for units of monsters, but should be tested.

Steadfast: (1.5) If Horror and Cause Fear changes, this should be raised to 2 and should ignore Horrore and Cause Fear as well.

Swimmer: (1.5) Nothing to say, maybe lower to 1.25 since there is much limitations.

Undead: (2) Hey, this virtually doubles the wounds of the units, should'nt be related to how many wound the unit had?

So for now this is all, I hope this help.

2006-10-05 22:02:53

And this is how the battle ends...

TURN 3

Dice are rolled, I get 13 point, Uruk 7, Again I'll start.

Riders on right flank attack, in a vortex of sword, lance and hooves the dunlendings were wiped out... Take this long beard!! I reorganize in a column to flank again.

Uruk pikemen grimly advance toward the center, they not arrive to charge my riders but it's a matter of time...

Since charging is better than be charged my bannered riders clash versus the Uruk pikemen.

Not a very good idea indeed... :oops:

Meanwhile uruk on left reform in a column, and go for the battle... or maybe to evade the Ent?

Veteran Uruk run for they're lives, outrun the ent but left the flank for the riders, who come for a glorius charge.

A the end of turn 3 this is the situation... not very cheery for rohan, but maybe with a good impact on the evil minion of Saruman...

TURN 4

Sadly the photocamera switch out, but the turn is a short and bloody affair...

10 point round for the Lord of Uruk, I get 15.

Of course I'll charge the flank of the Uruk... BOOOING!! Not even an element of Uruk die, so the response is brutal, one rider die and another flee... bad time for me.

Crying for happyness the Captain of Uruk order to finish the rohirrim, order prompty done by the evil guy... after this they reform to face may lonely captain.

He overhelmed by sorrow charge, willing to die but ready to take some with him... In effect he died orribly, but at least kill an element of Uruk.

Seeing the defeat I'll declare a general flee, the Uruk win the day and the banner of rohan lie under they're foot...

2006-10-05 21:13:57

Hi, I think I found two flaw in the point system, let see this:

First Flaw
I wish to recreate the army of the dead, an element of ghostly warriors.

Infantry
Move 4, Melee 2d8, Defense 4,3 wounds, morale 2+
Cause fear, Chaotic, Ignore Terrain, Impetous, Undead.
Cost 503 point per elements.

Ok, I think this is a little expensive... but after all the remnants of spirit in search for vengeange are'nt quite a monster? And so...

Monster (size 1)
Move 4, Melee 2d8, Defense 4, 3 wounds, morale -
Cause fear, Chaotic, Ignore Terrain, Impetous, Undead.
Cost 205 point per elements.

Quite expensive indeed, but imho 300 point less is a huge discount, and Morale 2+ could still fail.

Ok, allowing units of monster is a propostal, but if you do you should consider give morale value to all elements, even if alone or the point cost formula lost an important modifier.

Second Flaw:

I wish to recreate a huge artillery, a very big trebuchet or a big ballist or something weird and almighty...

Artillery of doom
Artillery
Move 2, Melee 2d4, Missile 3d12/20, Defense 1, 6 wounds, morale -
Piercing
Cost 147 point per elements.

Woha... maybe a little costly... but an artyllery should be near immobile right? So adding Rabble and Slow Moving:

Artillery
Move 2, Melee 2d4, Missile 3d12/20, Defense 1, 6 wounds, morale -
Piercing, Rabble, Slow Moving
Cost 52 point per elements.

This is a juicy discount and is justified... and if I can have battery of them allowing them to make units... brrr. Of course I can give them veteran (64pt) or better chaotic or disciplined (82pt) and it could bring down heaven...

So this is in short:

Morale is an important modifier for the point calculator, removing it from other than personalty make unbalanced units.

Defense and Wounds are a sensible matter. Very low defense (0 especially) can have a bunch of wound with no cost, high defense pay for it... now, much wound is definitely better than high defense.

Some ability is good but are too prone to abuse, must search and destroy... well maybe not destroy but sure make some limitations.

Hope this helping, see you soon.

2006-10-04 21:54:01

Hi, this is a two part BR since we have paused the game (we had only one hour) soon we'll finish.

We used GW Rohan (I) and Isegard, stats made by I, hexless rules.

Rohan have two captains, 3 units of 3 element of riders of rohan (one with banner) and Threebeard.

Isengard have only one commander, 1 unit of 5 Uruk pikemen (banner), 1 unit of 4 uruk warrior (veteran), 2 units of 4 Dunland warrior (both banner).

Deploy:

TURN 1

My captains allow me a grand-total of 4d6, Uruk only 1d10. I get 16 point, Uruk 9.

Both army go ahed, dunlandling take the hill on left, rider on right starts the longest flank attack in the history. Dunlendings see worried che riders that prepare themself for charging...

At the end of turn 1:

TURNO 2

Another 16 point for me and only 7 for the Uruk. My opponent cry "I'm a BLEEPing sitting duck" for my amusement :twisted:

Riders on left charge the dunlendings, combats are vicious with an element loss per side. Blood continue to flood until only one rider and one dunlending remain on the flank, but uruk warrior manage a flank attack killing the last rider

Meanwhile the flank manouver on the right come to an end, and Riders charge the Dunlendings in the right, aided by the second in command:

One dunlending element is throw out, but nothing more

You may ask what happened in the center...

Ok, I should charge... but who lend me the courage?

See you soon with the second part!!

2006-10-03 22:25:00

Sorry for the magic questions, I'd miss them... :oops:

About Reckless, let me explain:

Reckless: (.75) A reckless unit's opponent has its attack die type increased by one. Units with a d12 gain a +1 to hit against reckless units.

If I have a unit with defense 1 they are always hit on a 50% basis, regardless die type. So taking Reckless with a unit with defense 1 is a point reductor without malus.
If I'm correct consider that if a unit have defense 0 maybe is even a bonus, since higher dice have less chance of hitting.

I hope I'm clear.

2006-10-02 22:38:44

Thanks for the hi-speed answers, so I'll continue my barrage of questions :twisted: :

4) Reckless to a unit with defense 1 is a bug. Defense 1 is always hit with a 50% basis, so improving the dice tipe is useless, just a point reductor. Or maybe I'm missing something?

5) Apart common sense there is a limit to how many wound a creature can have?

6) Magic spell with "Apply special" factor apply to the entire units (alla elements) or only to one hex (element)? Same for Strike+Linger.

7) About magic, what is the point of the Drain factor? I mean, I understand the effect but is'nt a little too costly for what it does? 5 point to remove 1 point right?

8) The regroup order is a little odd to me. If I have a 11 element without range attack but overkill melee attack and 9+ of morale, regroup with a single element with same melee stats, 3d12/1000 range attack and 2+ morale I will have 12 element with 3d8/1000 range attack and 6+ morale for with a large discount... and after all is'nt more simple mantain all elements with is own stats?

See you soon, I've plenty of questions for you 8)

2006-10-02 21:00:21

Hi to all, I'm Zerloon, a new FTM Player

First of all I'd wish to greetings all people here, but since I've a lot of questions about the game let the fire begins:

1) Artillery, Monster and Personalty are supposed to be NOT in unit right? I mean, can I muster a unit o four Ogre or two ballista? I think the answer is no, but there is no line on the rulebook, so if it isn't forbidden...

2) Is an impression of mine or most of the units in the appendix have wrong cost? For example, boreal horseman cost 88 when for the point colculator should cost 100 who is wrong?

3) There is a unit minimun size?

Ok, for now is enough, see you soon. 8)

Welcome to the new Majestic Twelve Games Forum!

Search options (Page 2 of 2)

Posts found: 26 to 44 of 44

26 Reply by Zerloon 2007-01-06 22:39:01

Re: Hexless Rules (13 replies, posted in For the Masses)

27 Reply by Zerloon 2007-01-06 20:00:06

Re: Hexless Rules (13 replies, posted in For the Masses)

28 Reply by Zerloon 2007-01-05 21:55:57

Re: Hexless Rules (13 replies, posted in For the Masses)

29 Topic by Zerloon 2007-01-04 19:40:41

Topic: Hexless Rules (13 replies, posted in For the Masses)

30 Reply by Zerloon 2006-11-14 19:31:48

Re: The OGRE test. (3 replies, posted in For the Masses)

31 Reply by Zerloon 2006-11-09 23:07:27

Re: Battle Report Complete :D (9 replies, posted in For the Masses)

32 Reply by Zerloon 2006-10-16 18:06:45

Re: Spell Factors (6 replies, posted in For the Masses)

33 Reply by Zerloon 2006-10-15 18:20:30

Re: Spell Factors (6 replies, posted in For the Masses)

34 Topic by Zerloon 2006-10-13 22:56:36

Topic: Spell Factors (6 replies, posted in For the Masses)

35 Reply by Zerloon 2006-10-11 21:46:50

Re: Some nasty things (21 replies, posted in For the Masses)

36 Reply by Zerloon 2006-10-11 20:38:24

Re: Some nasty things (21 replies, posted in For the Masses)

37 Reply by Zerloon 2006-10-09 19:42:41

Re: Battle Report Complete :D (9 replies, posted in For the Masses)

38 Reply by Zerloon 2006-10-09 19:40:45

Re: Some nasty things (21 replies, posted in For the Masses)

39 Reply by Zerloon 2006-10-05 22:02:53

Re: Battle Report Complete :D (9 replies, posted in For the Masses)

40 Topic by Zerloon 2006-10-05 21:13:57

Topic: Some nasty things (21 replies, posted in For the Masses)

41 Topic by Zerloon 2006-10-04 21:54:01

Topic: Battle Report Complete :D (9 replies, posted in For the Masses)

42 Reply by Zerloon 2006-10-03 22:25:00

Re: Hi, greetings and some questions (6 replies, posted in For the Masses)

43 Reply by Zerloon 2006-10-02 22:38:44

Re: Hi, greetings and some questions (6 replies, posted in For the Masses)

44 Topic by Zerloon 2006-10-02 21:00:21

Topic: Hi, greetings and some questions (6 replies, posted in For the Masses)

Posts found: 26 to 44 of 44