1. Are the rules clear? Where do they need to be clarified? 2. Is anything missing? Are there situations where the rules don't cover what to do? 3. Are the rules fun? How do they feel? Only answer this question if you do a playtest. 4. What would you like to see added / removed?
What I am not looking for:
1. Feedback on spelling, grammar, or formatting. 2. Feedback on where more examples or illustrations need to be.
This is a rough draft, so please focus on giving feedback on the rules, which would include anything that is unclear.
Joined: Sun May 22, 2011 9:09 am Posts: 1446 Location: not sure. possibly one of the moons craters
for stealth coherency in a nutshell you said they need to saty in a certain distance of 1 other which implies someone might move them around in 2's and say they are in coherency of each other and only need be with 1 so is legal might want to include somethign along the lines of a chain like you must be able to by "jumping" form base to base go from any base to any other base. i know wy you made this so people could go up in a line instead of cluster but you need to make sure they keep some formation and not run aorund freely in 2's
After my first read through of the Aplha rules, theres only a couple of things that stood out for me.
Firstly - Ranged attacks distance penalties I feel needs better clarification. Such as: If the target is over the initial 8" range the attacker gains a -1 penalty and for every full 8" over the initial there is a further -1 modifier.
For example: Target 1 is 8" away - no penalty Target 2 is 9" away - -1 modifier as its over the initail 8" range Target 3 is 16" away - still only -1 modifier as it's not over 16"
Hopefully I've put that down fairly well, it was fine in my head....
Secondly, the Move or Shoot weapons regarding Overwatch and other things... That just confused the hell outta me...
Third and final that I saw is the 'Long Range' special rule with the sniper had no clarification as to what it does, although I'm guessing it negates the first -1 modifier meaning it would only get a -1 if the target were over 16" away.
Thats it so far, going to read through it all several times yet before i try a game out. By all accounts though, I'm liking it so far Thumbs up from me!
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2011 2:37 pm Posts: 536 Location: Drenthe, Holland
excited to see some alpha rules, here are some thoughts (while i'm reading it)
-first, certain rolls are called 'skill'/'attribute' rolls. later on it doesn't mention those, but you drop the words 'leadership check' which would be confusing for new players i bet.
-terrain is well explained
-you get into phases of the 'player turn' before you explain what 40k would call the 'game turn'
-picking up weapons seems much of a hassle to me. you could just 'remove/kill another model instead of the special weapons guy.' but that might not be what you intended at all.
Example: A model fires its ranged weapon at a target. The Ranged Skill of the attacker is 11, and the Defense of the target is 2. Assuming no other penalties the attacker will need to roll 11 – 2 = 9 or less on 2d6. The player rolls 2d6 and gets a total of 6, which means he had a Margin of Success of 9 – 6 = 3. If he had rolled a 10, the Margin of Failure would be 10 – 9 = 1. If he rolled a 9, then the roll would be successful, with a 0 Margin of Success.
things marked red is why it made no sense at all. should one take target roll - rolled result , the other way around, or highest - lowest? it is not clear from the above text, which was the example.
-what does the margin of success do here? (in the to-hit section)
-in the wounding section the succes margin gives more wounds, the larger it gets. which would mean that the target roll is the worst roll you can get, and the farther the roll is off, the more wounds you do. which makes no sense. now it would make sense if the success margin would only be positive when you actually roll higher than the target roll, but, as in the quote, the example doesn't state that.
-a 0 margin of success sounds bad. is it?
-close combat attack's skill roll's (i.e. to-hit) are made against target's armor, rather than defense or opposing CC skill. some people might think it now wounds automatically, since you already rolled against armor. or do you roll against armor twice?
-overwatch says that the 45 degrees template's small end should be touching the model itself, rather than the base, which would seem logical.
-overwatch can 'interrupt' enemy movement. it does not say what 'interrupting' means. do the models stop on the spot?
-overwatch is stopped if an enemy model moves into base contact. if that enemy does so, but in line of sight and in the 45o arc, will it then be stopped from charging, or will the overwatch be stopped because of base contact?
If a model has multiple weapons, the player must declare which weapon it is using when it first goes on Overwatch.
so you don't need to declare what weapon he's using for a regular shooting attack?
- 'combat ready' states: ' ..template anywhere in base contact with the model, with the small end of the arc touching the model...' that makes for awkwardly bended templates
- first of all, it isn't stated what AOE stands for. luckily i know (Area Of Effect)
To take a Suppressive Fire action, the suppressing squad must spend a Command Point (see the Command Points section for more information on how to spend Command Points). The controlling player then places an AOE template whose size is determined by the number of models performing the suppressing fire anywhere within line of sight of all the models. Part of the AOE can be out of line of sight of any of the models, but all models must be able to see the AOE
all models on the battlefield? all models suppressing? all models being suppressed? you get it. not clear. (sorry, it's getting kinda late lol)
Stealth Coherency The false bases must stay within a certain distance of each other, equal to the Stealth Level x 3 in inches. A base need only be within this distance of one other base.
so 4/6 stealth bases could separate into pairs of two bases?
Revealing When a player reveals which base is the actual model, simply replace that base with the model. If the base no longer exists, then the model is counted as destroyed and the rest of the bases are removed from play
so even if the base with the actual unit on it is destroyed, the decoys stay, as to keep the opponent guessing? actually sounds fun.
-in the rocket launcher's profile it says AOE 3. i guess that means the 3" template, but i'm not sure
-the sniper rifle's profile gives +1 perception. why not just add that to the sniper's profile instead of adding a (forgettable) rule to the gun?
here i reach the end of the PDF, at 11.30 PM lol. i'm liking what i'm seeing, especially the DP fist on the assassin.
i hope that this grandmother of all long posts isn't to much of a read happy wargaming -
_________________ "i buy me new deffkopta!!" "waaaagh!" "i did research, to find out how to minimize the randomness of the shock-attack gun." "huh?" "waaaagh!" "WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGH!!"
I definitely see a lot of similarities between DP and Infinty, as well as WM/H. Might give you some extra insight.
2 points I noticed that haven't yet been mentioned: - The difficult terrain rule states that movement is effected "while within", but then in the example states it would take 2" to move through 1" of difficult terrain. How is "within" determined? If it means any part of the base is in difficult terrain, the example is only accurate for a point sized base with a 0mm radius (which I'm assuming is therefore incorrect.)
- When suppressed, a model most move until it is "in cover" which is never defined. Cover penalties are applied if half of the model is obscured (assuming obscured from the attacker), so how does this apply to being suppressed? Most a model just be in cover from any enemy? All enemies (could easily become impossible)? Just be "near" something that has the possibility of granting cover?
It seems to me that the suppressed units would probably move until either in area terrain or until they are obscured to the model that provoked the leadership check (meaning the one that either hit the rolling model, or killed the model that was in 6 inches). Does that sound right Matt?
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 4:39 pm Posts: 1187 Location: Sarnia, ON
I am not going to lie Matt, because I like you as a gamer, but this comes across as a pretty big warmahorde rip off, I am hoping you are going to deviate the rules from this a decent amount to make it more your own game.
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 2:06 am Posts: 272 Location: Pittsburgh PA
I understand why people are saying it has similarities to Infinity and Warma/Hordes, but i would suggest to Read over these rules several times and actually play test them to see. Matt has been MORE than Fair and Kind enough to supply these forums and Videos, hes done a lot for the Wargamer community, we owe it to him to make a through educated decision on these rules, and not just browse through the set and dismiss it because it has a few similarities to other games. You can find Similarities to all Table Top Games inside other Table top games...its just the way it is, just sayin guys we owe it to Matt to give it a FAIR shot.
I havent play tested them yet, but i've red them fully 10 times and feel at this point I can comment. I really like certain aspects of this game. As I re-read certain parts i could feel the smile on my face showing, because certain parts of this game REALLY get me excited. The OverWatch and Combat ready...Brilliant, with the "Arc of Action" we'll call it, the 45 degree and 90 degree? to cover corners or prepare for an enemy to think twice before charging. Really all of the "Action" Abilities seem like they're going to just add another level to the game! I can see this game already being an Extremely tactical game, I can already tell you're going to need to be a move or 3 ahead of your opponent at all times.
I expected it to be a Tactical Rule set, from how i've become to Know Matt through his Walk and Talks and weight loss challenge, hes made it clear that he doesnt like the luck aspect, or chance so much as he would like to be rewarded for tactical decisions.
The only problem I for-see just from reading the rules, and not actually play testing it, on a "Grand Scale" It may be too smart. In an era where all other games are trying to "Dumb Down" or "Simplify" their rules i guess to make it more appealing to the public? I'm not saying the rules are too complicated because they seem fairly easy to understand, but the tactics level, Its closer to an open world Chess than 40k...doesn't seem like a hack and slash type of game, I Dunno...i'll have to play it over a few times to say for sure, but we'll see.
Joined: Sun May 22, 2011 9:09 am Posts: 1446 Location: not sure. possibly one of the moons craters
well when i looked over it it seemed like every none GW games. if i am right in sayingonly GW games do all movement and shooting at once all other games the units go one at a time right? and the thing that really hit as a warmachine rip was the deviation but really if he did scatter dices people would say the same thing that he was ripping of GW. and i cant think of any opther way to miss with a blast
P.S. id rather rip of PP then GW. PP at worst will make you remove it. GW will take you to court.
I did use the deviation template from Warmachine, only because GW has trademarked their scatter dice, and Warmachine's deviation is actually quite standard.
And yes, Warmachine uses AOEs, and so does Dark Potential, and so does D&D, and so does Infinity, etc. etc.
As KenStorm989 said, you really need to play it to see how it works out. Aside from the basic similarities, you are going to find that it plays very differently to Warmachine. As for Infinity I don't know as I've never played it.