76

(5 replies, posted in Defiance)

Personally in the case of alternative activation, I would be hard pressed not to include several heroes. With 50% ad-hoc it would be easy to stack the hell out of the initiative without losing any real tactical advantages- it would just be expensive, but when you can guarantee perfect activation you can field fragile units much more safely.

77

(3 replies, posted in Defiance)

It's more a matter of... well, 28mm is a broken scale for realism. I love 28mm and it looks great, and you can take some time with an individual miniature, but if you want scifi realism probably 6 to 10 mm. Actually I'd love to get into a new scale but I am short of funds sad

78

(5 replies, posted in Defiance)

It might break things a little. For example, each hero is its own unit, so is disproportionately valuable as an initiative-stacker in a by-unit system. But basically the way to do it would be to drop the Command points altogether, as well as anything else that nets you a "command" card.

If I were you I'd try the Initiative as written. It makes tracking the turn to completion easier and keeps an element of doubt. It also makes the game quite chaotic (which I like).

79

(5 replies, posted in Defiance)

Me? Smash? I'll throw them to Steave's Black Watch. They kill everyone they meet just as a polite greeting, let alone what they might do in a proper fight.

80

(7 replies, posted in Discussion)

I didn't say it was pretty. I said it was awesome. Well OK the spaceships are pretty AND awesome.

81

(7 replies, posted in Discussion)

http://www.davidcsimon.com/crimsondark/ … strip_id=1

Spaceships! Splosions! Drama! Irony! I like it.

82

(16 replies, posted in Discussion)

Vit C, Zinc, and if you get coldsores, a high rate of L-Lysine. Keep the fluids up.

83

(6 replies, posted in Defiance)

o.O


TNJRP is awesome. Or a nerd. Or an AWESOME NERD.

84

(6 replies, posted in Defiance)

Cool! If you get it all typed up, you could ask TNJRP about hosting the file so we can all have a look at it!

Anyway, I hope I'm being helpful. If I'm spewing junk data just slap me.

85

(6 replies, posted in Defiance)

Actually didn't Demian do a Swarm demo army? In my experience his armies are pretty good- oddly enough- they might serve to get you going, until you have a better idea of what works, and what you enjoy, in-game.

Hmm, yes, Organic-Biotech and Space Thugs might save you some number-crunching. I find it easier to completely change an existing list than to cut a new one from new cloth, so to speak, but then I'm like that.

86

(6 replies, posted in Defiance)

I'll start with the Commander questions, since they're the easiest.

#2
In a non-matrix army, such as Orks, there is 1 overall Commander/Leader. In this case he's called a Big Boss. My plans for him are to create a unit with him as the only member and make him a level 1 or 2 commander. This will gain me an extra activation card(s). If another one of my units has several broken figures, can he join that unit to help with individual rally rolls? This would mean 2 units have now joined together.

A Primary Commander IIRC must be chosen as part of a standard unit, ref page 14 "How Units Activate" subheading "Primary Commader". HOWEVER he can leave that unit the start of any turn, and freely join another unit at the start of any subsequent turn: ref page 19, "Commanders" for more details. In other words just roll with the standard rules on this, they're quite close to what you want.

EDIT: I'm pretty sure you can legally create a standard unit that is just the commander. That uses up one of your 15 Standard Units. But, you really don't need to. But, I wouldn't object to an opponent doing that, anyway.



#3
Continuing with the above situation. Say the commander is allowed to join another unit. When would the combined unit activate? When the commander's unit card is drawn or the other unit's card?

When the Primary Commander joins a unit, they use the same activation card- remove the Commander's Activation (not Command) card from the deck. When he splits from a unit, they go onto separate cards again, so put the Commander's Activation card back in the initiative deck.

On to the Matrix questions:

#1
The Games Workshop 40K Tyranid army is a great fit for a Matrix style army. The basic troopers (Termagaunts, Hormagaunts, Gargoyles) are all matrix units. The Tyranid warriors and the Hive Tyrant are Focal Leaders. My question is, how do I assign Tyranid warriors to lead Termagaunts? I think the answer is to create Ad-Hoc units. For example, combine a unit of 10 Termagaunts with another unit of 2 Tyranid warriors both of whom are Focal Leaders. Is this correct?

While correct it may be sub-optimal. If this helps, a Focal point is not necessarily a Leader, it just indicates that the group intelligence networks through a particular node. I'd just allow Focal Points in any Matrix unit; it could mean that the Hive Mind happens to be focusing some attention on that swarm at this moment.

Otherwise, yes, Ad-Hoc or mixed-frame and therefor Exclusive units would be the go IMO.

87

(3 replies, posted in Defiance)

I'd say the Dragoon probably has 2 DC, so check the costs against that and assume a typo in the army list.

EDIT: checked that, no way it has 2 DC at 24 points. So my revised advice is that the Size has been arbitrarily bumped to 3 either by accident or to reflect the Dragoon being on a light "jet skiff".

My assumption has always been that Size has no points cost (it makes you slightly easier to shoot at) but this isn't explicitly stated in the builder rules AFAIK- although you can arbitrarily designate ALL frames as Sz 3 if you want (and this is both stated explicitly and done at no cost.)

88

(11 replies, posted in Defiance)

In Reaper's game, Warlord, which has a slightly similar initiative system to Defiance, taking too few units (and hence getting too few initiative cards) is considered a significant error. In that system, individual heroes (called Solos) are used to pad out the deck. In Defiance the idea is not to go first, or last, but to manipulate initiative so that your opponent is always reacting to you and conversely to be able to react quickly yourself if your opponent gains the upper hand; to have more cards in the deck increases uncertainty for HIM while offering finer granularity in tactical decisions for YOU.

Damn, this is hard to express clearly. It's subtle in concept but can be violently and lethally obvious in (make believe) combat.

Flexibility doesn't SOUND important, but try fielding the Devastating Marines from the Black Watch (and Demian's Star Marines I think, originally). The simple fact of two solid, single task, long range weapons falling into Primary and Support roles makes for a unit with no serious, exploitable weakness in a toe-to-toe fight (I refer to Heavy Riveter Pri., Laser Cannon Supp.) Scary bastards.

89

(10 replies, posted in Discussion)

No.

90

(11 replies, posted in Defiance)

Let us know how it goes! Watch out for initiative, having that big unit go dead last on the first turn with IF in play could really sting.

91

(11 replies, posted in Defiance)

Well, I may be wrong, but at say, Regular discipline with a max squad size of 8 and Mob Option:

If minimum squad size was doubled, a minimum mob would be two LARGER than a squad at full strength. Now, a mob already loses one point of leadership, or one point of command, or both if available, and ALSO can't receive command cards from the Primary Commander. The loss of Leadership and Command levels is roughly 30-40PV for the Leadership and 30-60PV for the Command if you're silly enough (IMO) to put a Commander with a Mob.

So by this stage, for the privilege of having a very large and unwieldly unit you've paid 2-3 troopers' PV worth of Leadership and at least an additional 2 troopers to keep the unit from breaking early.

So, IMO only, doubling minimum squad size is overly harsh: to do so renders Mobs useless even before the already established penalties. You pay 2  Strat points for Mob: for example the same can get you Pie Plate of Doom IF weapons (4 inches, woohoo!) plus Reserves or access to Field Saves AND Phase weapons, or the Cool Head individual morale rules, or 25 frames. 25 frames versus 15 is a big advantage and much more forgiving!

Anyway, back to the question: I think the Banner is a specific Doesn't Suck With Mobs option. It has to be specific because all other Leadership explicitly Sucks With Mobs.



A question, tnjrp: did your group decide that Mobs needed nobbling because they repeatedly proved overwhelming, or did they just not  LIKE the idea of a unit of 20 with minimum size of 4?







In about 3 minutes Demian will show up and bat aside my intuition with solid numbers. Till then, I'll take any other option at the Strategic/Frame level before Mob (unless I take Banzai Charge).

92

(30 replies, posted in Discussion)

underling wrote:

Well, this is probably all a moot discussion anyway.
In this new "spread the wealth" era, ranks will be going away. 
Because we're all the same, right?
The "high number of posts" people should be expected to give us "lower number of posts" people some of their posts, right?
wink

In hell.

93

(8 replies, posted in Game Design)

You ignore all development costs and any of your own time you sink into development, end up 1000's behind in real terms, but brag to everyone that you turned a healthy "profit" which in fact is not even an accurate "gross margin".

94

(2 replies, posted in Defiance)

Just to be sure.... can a flying APC or AFV be built? One version of the rules sais "no".

Also, are there costs for Flying Mecha or Anime Mecha?

95

(7 replies, posted in Discussion)

He's confident that a Gaussian rooted his chi?

96

(6 replies, posted in Discussion)

5% + seems a little harsh for a relatively small forum.

So far I haven't been able to find any specific post -at all- using the search function, due to this rule. Can the filtering be turned off?

97

(5 replies, posted in Defiance)

Maximum terrain depth affects cone weapons? Who knew?

Anyway there was at least one occasion where a decent grenade would have made a difference. And yes, APCs are VERY useful, I wish I'd fielded more of them.

98

(5 replies, posted in Defiance)

Those machine troops tore people a variety of novel new orifices, too. Chief amongst their weapons (apart from surprise and a near-fanatical loyalty to the Pope) was the Dreadbot, a 6J AR something-or-other 2 DC vehicle with an artillery rocket and a backup rack of RoF 4 AV missiles. Apart from that they had a nice range of simple but brutal weapons that really tended to f* people up.

Next time I think I'd like to see them and the Black Watch go toe-to-toe.

99

(5 replies, posted in Defiance)

A marine in a FLORAL dress!

I am utterly perplexed with GW's marine-in-a-dress fetish by the way.

It bears pointing out though that Steave's Black Watch, a remixed Star Marine army, was brutality on a stick the whole weekend and didn't lose a battle. Devastating Marines, with Heavy Riveter as Primary and Laser Cannon as Support can really ruin anyone's day. Especially if like me, you were heavy on Standard Infantry and AME's when you faced them.

Also, Steave's scouts had a weapon of my design, the Smoothbore, based on an AAS12 with selectable buckshot or HE rounds.

Here's a link to the weapon that inspired it:

http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=741

The fear instilled by this shotgun of doom can be seen in the brutal and highly selective manner in which I exterminated everyone carrying one.[size=85] How dearly I paid![/size] I'd post the stats but the format gets changed between clicking "submit" and actual viewing, so get it from the Black Watch list, available here:

http://herosgames.homestead.com/DVG.html

100

(6 replies, posted in Discussion)

On the Defiance sub-forum:

The following words in your search query were ignored because they are too common words: cover firing through


The "common words" blocking sucks. Can it be turned off, at least for "common words" that in gamer lexicon are technical and/or specific?