Author Topic: Dark Elves - Dwarves 2000 Terrain, Total Warfare  (Read 1067 times)

Kevin

  • Playtester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5154
Re: Dark Elves - Dwarves 2000 Terrain, Total Warfare
« Reply #15 on: November 06, 2017, 06:02:32 PM »
Thanks, Corey. :)

Quote
That being said, the way they work right now is terrible and Lashmistresses (as they are currently written) are near the top of my Burn List.  I think having out-of-turn movement like that is simply poor execution and can feel frustrating because the opposing player can do almost nothing about it.  When they get redone I think a more elegant solution is to give the opposing unit an "Auto-close w/Lashmistresses as target" on the next turn.  I'm up in the air about letting the person spend 3 CAs to control the unit.

Worth noting that in this game (not necessarily all games, but this one), this rule--at least without the 3-CA-to-Direct-Contol option--would have made the Lashmistress better for the Dark Elves.  The Longboards would've had only one turn to hack at my LM before the pinch rather than 2, which would've meant that rather than about a coin flip I'd have to make a rout check it would've been a tiny chance.  Also, in general that would give the LM a melee attack on turn 1 of the engagement--something that she used to get but was removed for balance--unless you put in a special rule like "No engaged attack the turn after the LM fires."  (or No engaged attacks turn 1 of any engagement, period.  Which would be a moderate-level nerf.)
However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results. - Winston Churchill

Hannibal

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4599
Re: Dark Elves - Dwarves 2000 Terrain, Total Warfare
« Reply #16 on: November 06, 2017, 06:17:41 PM »
Quote
That being said, the way they work right now is terrible and Lashmistresses (as they are currently written) are near the top of my Burn List.  I think having out-of-turn movement like that is simply poor execution and can feel frustrating because the opposing player can do almost nothing about it.  When they get redone I think a more elegant solution is to give the opposing unit an "Auto-close w/Lashmistresses as target" on the next turn.  I'm up in the air about letting the person spend 3 CAs to control the unit.

Worth noting that in this game (not necessarily all games, but this one), this rule--at least without the 3-CA-to-Direct-Contol option--would have made the Lashmistress better for the Dark Elves.  The Longboards would've had only one turn to hack at my LM before the pinch rather than 2

Yeah I was thinking the same thing, but this adjustment would also mean that the Longbeards don't move in both player's turns.  So the owning player would have their turn to try to do something about being pulled into combat.

In this case, Blakely erred in rushing forward with those Longbeards & then left them within 3.5" on the turn she DC'd them.  Not much we can do about that.  8)

Kevin

  • Playtester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5154
Re: Dark Elves - Dwarves 2000 Terrain, Total Warfare
« Reply #17 on: November 06, 2017, 07:18:01 PM »
It would save the player a Command Action to keep their line straight when the lines are far apart, but once you get within Final Rush range of the Lashmistress (or more to the point, close enough that she can move, ideally tilt, and get your unit within FR range), it doesn't matter whether you move that turn or next [1].  Your unit will final rush before its allies can move and if the LM tilted that unit's butt will be in its neighbors' face and a pinch is likely.  Best defense of course is to have the unit facing the LM lag its neighbors just far enough--but no so far that a neighbor gets lashed in and you get the same issue.


[1] Except insofar as which unit is heavier.  if your unit can take on the LM one-on-one (or at least put some hurt on before it gets pinched away) you'd rather it move on the turn it's lashed.  If your unit is small and likely to splat quickly you'd rather wait.  It also makes a difference if the LM can pull your unit into a different Dark Elf unit, but speaking as someone with little experience with it, that seems pretty tough to set up in the early game.
However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results. - Winston Churchill

Hannibal

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4599
Re: Dark Elves - Dwarves 2000 Terrain, Total Warfare
« Reply #18 on: November 06, 2017, 07:43:13 PM »
It would save the player a Command Action to keep their line straight when the lines are far apart,

Which is not nothing.  Not having your unit move in both turns means you don't race out & expose your flanks.


Quote
but once you get within Final Rush range of the Lashmistress (or more to the point, close enough that she can move, ideally tilt, and get your unit within FR range), it doesn't matter whether you move that turn or next [1].


In most cases I would agree, but there are times when you can manipulate order of operations to prevent a unit from final rushing into a bad position.  For example, there's times when I want to do a Two's Company but being Lashed means that only one of my units gets in and the other has to spent 2 turns moving around to flank charge.  And sometimes you want to block one of the two units from a Two's Company because it'd expose the flank to an enemy.

RushAss

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3837
  • Eat your beets - Recycle!
    • My Facebook.  Where you can see my, uh... face.
Re: Dark Elves - Dwarves 2000 Terrain, Total Warfare
« Reply #19 on: November 07, 2017, 10:00:47 AM »
Their immobility is something Chad & co recognized and tried to rectify with Sprint, but even in it's errata'd form I feel it falls flat.  I'd like to see some form of "Forced March" to replace sprint.  Something like "Spend a CA to mark the Forced March box.  While it is marked the unit gets +1 MC when it suffers an MC penalty from Maneuvers.  If unengaged you may mark 1 damage box and erase the Forced March box after Final Rush movement to make the unit MC 5" this turn."

You had me until the part where Dwarves can move 5".  As much as I carp about Dwarven movement where non-hill terrain is involved, that sluggishness is what makes them what they are.  I'm OK with them having that weakness.

I actually think that Healer Mages are a trap unit.  Maybe in long drawn out Total Warfare games they're worth it, but in most cases I'd rather have the 200pts on my line. 

I largely agree here, but boy is a healer effective when most of your units have a good defensive stat.  If you are in a situation where your formation is going to remain relatively tight, Healers are awesome in some Dwarven and High Elven builds.

Yeah and the returns for double stacking are really not worth it.  One card boosts a Cge 12 Yellow check from 63% to 90% chance of passing.  Double stacking boosts that one unit to 99% pass, for sure, but you're better off boosting two units to only failing 1 time in 10.

Oh 1000 times yes.  It's a rare day when I double stack Dwarven courage cards.  It only happens when there's desperation in the air.
"You can never break the chain - There is never love without pain
A gentle hand, a secret touch on the heart
A healing hand, as secret touch on the heart"
-Rush, Secret Touch

Kevin

  • Playtester
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5154
Re: Dark Elves - Dwarves 2000 Terrain, Total Warfare
« Reply #20 on: November 07, 2017, 11:52:22 AM »
I neglected to mention earlier, but one area where the LM causing movement on the opponent turn rather than the DE turn would be a big deal would be vs. units that are Auto-Close or "Stupid" (like Ogres).  Now instead of the opponent not wasting one CA each turn they're not wasting 2-3.  (Or, to translate that to reality, now those units don't automatically stay in the box vs. the Dark Elves.)
However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results. - Winston Churchill

Hannibal

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4599
Re: Dark Elves - Dwarves 2000 Terrain, Total Warfare
« Reply #21 on: November 08, 2017, 10:54:51 AM »
Their immobility is something Chad & co recognized and tried to rectify with Sprint, but even in it's errata'd form I feel it falls flat.  I'd like to see some form of "Forced March" to replace sprint.  Something like "Spend a CA to mark the Forced March box.  While it is marked the unit gets +1 MC when it suffers an MC penalty from Maneuvers.  If unengaged you may mark 1 damage box and erase the Forced March box after Final Rush movement to make the unit MC 5" this turn."

You had me until the part where Dwarves can move 5".  As much as I carp about Dwarven movement where non-hill terrain is involved, that sluggishness is what makes them what they are.  I'm OK with them having that weakness.

Yeah I hear you, and it's probably a bad idea.  And while I 100% agree with you that having a weakness is a good thing for factions, when that weakness is really crippling I think we should take a serious look at the issue.  Like I said, I feel Antonians are almost mandatory with Dwarves and if we included some cheaper unit (like 5" Boar or Ram riders), then you'd just make them an almost mandatory choice.



Quote
I actually think that Healer Mages are a trap unit.  Maybe in long drawn out Total Warfare games they're worth it, but in most cases I'd rather have the 200pts on my line. 

I largely agree here, but boy is a healer effective when most of your units have a good defensive stat.  If you are in a situation where your formation is going to remain relatively tight, Healers are awesome in some Dwarven and High Elven builds.

Yeah but by the same token:  if Blakely had dropped the Healer Mages she had the points to upgrade one of those Spearmen to Longbeards (I believe she had some points left over).  My personal preference is to spend points on offense.

(And Blakely: I don't mean to pick on you here.  Your army is just the example we have here.  If Tim did it, I'd be picking on him)