Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Session Reports / Re: Ravenwood - Rome 2000 Terrain
« Last post by Kevin on October 08, 2019, 09:17:55 AM »
Thanks.  And yeah, the vultures always appreciate a perch rather than having to circle around all day.   ;D
2
Session Reports / Re: Ravenwood - Rome 2000 Terrain
« Last post by RushAss on October 07, 2019, 02:00:45 PM »
Great to see you two at it again, and nice write up!  I see that both of you brought the beef in the center.  That's not something you see very often from Rome.  And yeah, some serious courage failures for Rome as well.  Hey, it happens!  It's weird that she tossed the Equites in there so quickly.  Otherwise a solid game from both of you.

Yay beefy Ravenwood armies!  And kind of you to stick to your guarantee to keep the Treants in your back yard so the birds could have a place to hang out.
3
House Rules, Unofficial Variants and Proposals / Re: Alternate Ranged Idea
« Last post by Hannibal on October 04, 2019, 08:39:16 PM »
I usually keep my archers on long range.  I usually have at least two ranged units.  (I've been known to have more).  :)

I think that's the crux of the issue.  If you want to maximize damage, then you'll need to put your archers on Short.

If you put your archers on Long, you're doing early damage but less overall.

If we changed the rules to maximize damage when at Long range,  then Stand & Shoots would become dominant again.  And that's not something we want.

That said, I'm open to looking at the penalty for Move & Shoot and the penalty for Not the Closest (going from -1 skill to -1 die).
4
House Rules, Unofficial Variants and Proposals / Re: Alternate Ranged Idea
« Last post by gornhorror on October 04, 2019, 01:41:38 PM »
I usually keep my archers on long range.  I usually have at least two ranged units.  (I've been known to have more).  :)

I play Ravenwood a-lot.........
5
Session Reports / Ravenwood - Rome 2000 Terrain
« Last post by Kevin on September 29, 2019, 10:23:31 PM »
It had been a while since we've played, and even longer since we took photos, but Blakely and I did our best to shake off the rust and play a game last week.  I forgot my camera, so she snapped the photos and thus the game photos are from her point of view

I spotted Blakely 150 points, but otherwise battled as ruthlessly as possible.




Set Up and Strategy

Ravenwood left to right:  Wolfkin behind Brownies, Bearkin, Bear Pack, Bear Pack, Brownies behind Bearkin, Bearkin, Wolf Pack.

Having battled on this map before, I knew that those impassable craters produce an extremely narrow battlefield.  Probably would've taken Treants, but had promised Blakely I wouldn't.  Considered stand-and-shoot, but Romans are too durable. 

In any case, the plan was to get bears onto the high ground and grind it out as best I could.  I wasn't happy with my deployment, though.  I deployed first, and mistakenly laid the left Brownies down early, thinking they'd guard the flank, but when Blakely put a weak unit opposite my Bearkin there was nothing to guard and they accomplished nothing all game.  Similarly, I rued not having the Wolfkin and Wolf Pack in opposite places, as only a 7" mover can hope to circle the far crater and get in the action.

Rome, left to right:  Velites (gap), Triarii behind Triarii, Veteran Principes, Extraordinarii, Extraordinarii, Triarii behind Veteran Principes, Equites.

An excellent army and deployment, with a short infantry line with only one weak spot (and even that was durable).  The Equites is heavily favored vs. my Wolf Pack on the flank that's more a danger to her, while the skirmisher would be enough to ensure my Wolfkin never see action.





Cocky Equites

The armies go forward, each curling back on our weaker flank.  But what's this?  The 148-point Equites decide not to bother running down my wolves who are hanging out in my back corner, but zip past her slower infantry to go right into my 244-point Bearkin!  They actually put on quite the initial hit, and had my Bearkin failed their rout check (needing a 12, and I had no cards to help) they'd have single-handedly won the fight and eternal glory!  But my Bearkin hold.  And now her flank is unprotected.





First Blood

Left to right:

Velites fail their "second" rout check vs. Wolfkin and disintegrate, but the Wolfkin are 5 inches behind where they otherwise would be.

Bearkin start to beat up Triarii, but this will take a while.

Bear Packs go roughly even vs. their opponents.  They do have the high ground vs. Triarii, which makes it a roughly even fight.

Mediocre attack dice and lots of blue card love keep my Bearkin shockingly healthy vs. Extraordinarii. 

Blakely had to burn a card to keep the Equites from running when they hit yellow, but they rout and die when they hit the red.

Meanwhile, my Wolf Pack has gone forward, and is threatening a flank-pinch, so the Veteran Principes turn to face the wolves.





Routs Galore!

Left to fight.

Triarii are holding up OK, but the adjacent Veteran Principes hit the yellow, blow two rout checks, and pop. 

Units on the hill continue to grind it out, going roughly tit for tat.

Extraordinarii are pinched and immediately rout.  They survive, but are very heavily damaged and are never rallied.

Wolfkin are direct-controlled to get within no-turning-back range of the Veteran Principes, protecting their allies.  Furthermore, they're positioned so that my other units will be out of the Veteran Principes' front arc, ensuring they'll be out of the rest of the fight for a while.




White Flag

Blakely basically needed a miracle at this point, but didn't get one.

Left to right:

I finally blow a rout check and my Bearkin run.  Their Triarii opponents will move next turn, so can tag them -- except that they run too!

The Triarii, previously in the rear, move forward and are engaged by my Bear Pack which is just barely in the yellow.  Advantage bears.

Extraordinarii and Bear Pack on the hill continue to maul each other.  Whichever one prevails won't have much left.

My own Bearkin is sliding forward to help, but it'll take  a little while.

Triarii are fighting Bearkin, while the Veteran Principes are beating the tar out of my Wolf Pack which annoyingly (for me) refused to rout.


With a flank mostly gone, and other units (apart from the Veteran Principes on the right) getting heavily ground down, we called it here. 


Victory to Ravenwood!

Blakely's courage dice were dismal, and her attack dice were mediocre at best.  Probably that doomed her either way, but leaving that right flank open definitely sped that up.  Still, that aside, it was a fun match.

6
House Rules, Unofficial Variants and Proposals / Re: Alternate Ranged Idea
« Last post by Hannibal on September 27, 2019, 05:03:12 PM »
This rules seemed to not cause anybody to get their nickers in a twist.   However, that being said, I would like to clarify something.....

On rule 5, by "one round" I mean two shots....

Ah.  Well that I'd be against.  1 CA for +1 shot is as good as a Cunning. 

And that's on a regular bowman.  On a unit like Longbowmen it's like getting a Cunning and a +1 Pow.  Those are already really good returns when you spend 1 CA for 1 ammo box. 

Spending 1 CA for 2 ammo boxes is way too good.  It's something we playtested when these rules first got posted to the Rules Team.



Quote
Example...On my turn I spend one command action to give a ranged unit a shot on my turn and on my opponents turn. 

I found that if you want to take a archery heavy army,

OOC what are you defining as an archery heavy army?  Are you saying a Stand & Shoot?  Or are you saying two bow units behind the line, but the line advancing?

Do you happen to have pictures of your games where you took those builds?  Or any write ups that we can look at (e.g. on what turn did the lines engage, how many turns was the combat/game, what scenario were you playing, at what range were you shooting, etc.)?



Quote
getting only one shot per command action is too cost prohibitive.  It doesn't seem balanced to me.  It also is really bad when on the "off" turn you end up firing on something you don't want to fire on and waste a shot.

I say this with all due respect, but I seldom have this happen.  Usually it only happens when my archery (& a melee unit) have blown a hole in the enemy's line.  And in those situations, I'm okay with the archer shooting at a sub-par target because the archer unit did it job:  it helped create a breakthrough.

The other time it has come up is when I've done a Stand & Shoot (or some other heavy shooting army), and my opponent rushes forward some sacrificial unit.  That hasn't bothered me yet because even Antonians (functionally Def skill 5 against shooting) dies pretty quickly when shot at by a pair of Ravenwood archers.

That's why I'd really like to see some battle reports.  I hear you when you say it's unbalanced, but I'd also like to review the evidence. 


And like I said, I'd be open to discussing making the 'not the closest' penalty a -1 die.  Having a less restrictive penalty on concentrating fire is something worth looking at (as is changing the M&S penalty), but I want to see some battle reports first.



Quote
As far as my proposal for rule #1, I just can't stand the extreme range penalty.  -1 offensive skill is enough for anything outside range 7"  I see any other penalty as un-fun OR unfair.


Historically I've been against this.  I've put up the math behind my reasoning in the Rules Team forum, so you can go take a look there.  That said, I'm definitely open to discussing this again, provided we start with you documenting session reports.  That way we can look at the context together and see if there's an issue.


Out of curiosity, how do you like to use archers?  What are your tactics for them?  Do you like to have a pair of archer units hanging back and shooting from long range?  Or do you have them hold fire until they're at Short range and then unleash a bunch of shoot from relatively close to the fight?

I ask because the shooting rules were intended that archers be close support if they want to maximize damage.  If you want the most damage out of those 6 ammo boxes, then the best thing to do is put them on Short, and have them hold fire until they reach Short Range.  This means they'll start shooting about when the two lines charge each other.  So you'll use your 6 ammo boxes on turns 3-5.  But you'll do ~6 damage (assuming an average archer vs an average unit).

If you like to shoot from Long Range with your archers, then you'll do damage on turns 1-3 but you'll do less (~4 damage).  With Long range damage you're reducing total damage in favor of having it earlier.

That's entirely by design.  See, the disadvantage to Short Range shooting is that it happens basically at the same time the lines meet.  And because dice don't actually average on any given roll, you might have the melee unit flub its die roll and not knock the enemy into the Yellow/Red even with the extra damage from the archers' shooting.

The upside to Short range shooting is that usually you can do enough damage with the ammo boxes that you don't feel the need to reload a lot.  With Long range shooting, you may find yourself wanting to do more damage and that's where you're feeling the bite of having to spend 1 CA for 1 Ammo box.

The upside to Long range shooting is you know which units are weakened by the time the combat starts.  So you know where to place your best Command Cards (so does your opponent, but this game is tilted towards offense so it's not as effective to play blue cards). 


All that said, if you hang back at Long range does increase the chances that you end up wasting a shot at something you don't want.  And if you hang back too far you can get hit with the Extreme range penalty. 

Now if you hang back too far, then you're functionally doing a (weird) S&S and we're trying to not make those too good with these rules.  However, I'm open to reexamining it.  And also to the idea that maybe we should adjust the move & shoot penalty and/or the 'not the closest' penalty too. 

That's why I'm trying to see how you like to play, and why some documented games would be really helpful.   :)
7
House Rules, Unofficial Variants and Proposals / Re: Alternate Ranged Idea
« Last post by gornhorror on September 26, 2019, 03:29:29 PM »
This rules seemed to not cause anybody to get their nickers in a twist.   However, that being said, I would like to clarify something.....

On rule 5, by "one round" I mean two shots....

Example...On my turn I spend one command action to give a ranged unit a shot on my turn and on my opponents turn. 

I found that if you want to take a archery heavy army, getting only one shot per command action is too cost prohibitive.  It doesn't seem balanced to me.  It also is really bad when on the "off" turn you end up firing on something you don't want to fire on and waste a shot.

As far as my proposal for rule #1, I just can't stand the extreme range penalty.  -1 offensive skill is enough for anything outside range 7"  I see any other penalty as un-fun OR unfair. 

So to reiterate the rules proposal.  (and I do this after playing with the current rules for quite some time) are:

1. Greater than range 7" (-1/-0) (no extreme range)
2. Move and shoot (-1) -0/-0
3. Firing on not the closest unit (-1) -0/-0
4. Used the ammo rule (limited ammo)
5. Fire every turn
5. To reload, one command action for two shots of fire.



8
House Rules, Unofficial Variants and Proposals / Re: Alternate Ranged Idea
« Last post by Hannibal on September 26, 2019, 12:39:16 PM »
We play a few 2 on 1 games and followed these rules for ranged fire.

1. Greater than range 7" (-1/-0) (no extreme range)
2. Move and shoot (-1) -0/-0
3. Firing on not the closest unit (-1) -0/-0
4. Used the ammo rule (limited ammo)
5. Fire every turn
5. To reload, one command action for one round of fire

I'd definitely be open to looking at this package of rules.  I'm still very leery of #1, but and am definitely open to #2 and #3.
9
House Rules, Unofficial Variants and Proposals / Re: Alternate Ranged Idea
« Last post by gornhorror on September 23, 2019, 12:59:54 PM »
Well it's been a while since anybody has posted on this topic.  Also, I know that the ranged rules are set but I have some suggestions to enhance ease of play in pick up games.  This weekend at Council nobody showed up for the Battleground tournament except Me, Marcus and Eric. 

We play a few 2 on 1 games and followed these rules for ranged fire.


1. Greater than range 7" (-1/-0) (no extreme range)
2. Move and shoot (-1) -0/-0
3. Firing on not the closest unit (-1) -0/-0
4. Used the ammo rule (limited ammo)
5. Fire every turn
5. To reload, one command action for one round of fire

It seemed to work out ok.  To me it still feels a bit under powered for two reasons. 

1. Sometimes on the off turn you are forced to waste shots (fire on a unit that you don't want to fire on)
2. Once you run out of  ammo, it's too command action costly to rearm


After playing with these official (?) rules for quite some time now I have a few suggestions for home brew play to make things flow better.

Get rid of the -1 die modifier for firing on units that are not the closest.
and.....
Give two shots for every command action spent to reload.

We also played one big game with the old ranged rules (firing only on your turn)  Not sure if Marcus liked it, but I KNOW Eric did.  He dislikes the new ranged rules.  Firing every has grown on me, but I still think some rules could be added/taken away to make them better.

Well, there it is......a post......haven't done one in a while.....
10
COUNCIL WEATHER
The forecast is clear and warm
Friday: Partly Cloudy, High 80, Low 55
Saturday: Sunny, High 85, Low 58
Sunday: Mostly Sunny, High 86, Low 64

LOCATION
BFW and SFB have been moved to the Guild Room at Proctors.  This is the fancy room that has hosted literally generations of wealthy Proctors patrons.  So this might be considered an upgrade.  The Guild room is still on the 2nd floor, directly across the Arcade.

BEVERAGES
Tos will be bringing his home brews once again.

Hope to see many of you this weekend.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10