Author Topic: Alternate Ranged Idea  (Read 14622 times)

Hannibal

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4918
Re: Alternate Ranged Idea
« Reply #60 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.

gornhorror

  • Rules Team
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1940
  • Goony goo-goo!
Re: Alternate Ranged Idea
« Reply #61 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.



« Last Edit: September 27, 2019, 02:16:20 PM by gornhorror »
Where's this shade, that you got it made?

Hannibal

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4918
Re: Alternate Ranged Idea
« Reply #62 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.   :)

gornhorror

  • Rules Team
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1940
  • Goony goo-goo!
Re: Alternate Ranged Idea
« Reply #63 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.........
Where's this shade, that you got it made?

Hannibal

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4918
Re: Alternate Ranged Idea
« Reply #64 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).