0.4.1 Feedback

Discuss the mechanics of Dark Potential here.
Forum rules
Please understand that by posting anything in this area of the forum that you are acknowledging that MiniWarGaming has permission to use your ideas without compensation.
Locked
cymruvoodoo
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 8:49 am

0.4.1 Feedback

Post by cymruvoodoo » Mon Sep 17, 2012 5:01 pm

Let's start with the website. Slick design, communicates well, but needs copy editing quite badly. Mistakes like "humanities" instead of the intended "humanity's" (one is a reference to social studies and the broad analysis of culture as expressed in literature, art, and philosophy, the other a possessive form of a proper noun.) on the "The Game" page make Dark Potential look like a bit more of a fly by night operation than the art, the miniatures, and the rules should prove. However, this is the alpha of the website as much as the rules and so I think for a first cut, this is very impressive. Clean up the spelling errors, clean up the grammar, and get a writer to tighten up the text and it'll be a fantastic showcase.

Next up:

New casualty removal rules! Very interesting. Up front, this removes some of the strategy which was present. Do I care? No way! Having to sit there while someone agonizes over which model to remove in order to try and mess up my plans in the middle of my turn is very silly and sometimes frustrating. I am not sure I agree with the way the rule is worded. Is there a particular reason to specify that the closest model to the source of the attack is removed regardless of line of sight? I think that it might be better, since we are working with TLoS in Dark Potential and quite a lot hinges on who can see whom in other circumstances, to specify that the closest visible models are removed first, followed by the closest non-visible models?

Running! Very interesting as well. In some respects I think I liked the idea of move and move better but I can understand quite well how having run be a subset of move makes the mechanics flow more smoothly. I am a bit surprised, a bit concerned about the fact that stealth tokens cannot run. Given how mobile everything else can be to be cut down to a single basic movement is a big change from what stealth models used to be able to do.

Flash grenades - a grenade that saps CP to represent disorientation? What a novel idea! Wish I'd thought of it. Nevertheless, this is a very interesting tool. It does raise some questions. First, what happens when a unit is subject to multiple flash grenades in the same round? Is it possible to loose more than one CP to being flashbanged (that sounds... so inappropriate. Must run Reclaimers now just so I can use that term constantly) in the same turn? What happens when a unit has no CP to loose? Is the flash grenade wasted? Is there a further non-CP penalty once the CP buffer is gone? Also, is there a good reason to specify "small base" instead of "grenade template" as with every other type of grenade? I think if you simply said "grenade template plus two inches" you would get the same as "small base plus three inches" and you would keep like things using like terminology and tools insofar as that's possible.

Stealth Mind Games! I love 'em. Now, that's probably just me, but I revel in getting to slap down stealth counters, look my opponent in the eye, and dare him or her to guess what shenanigans I'm pulling this time around. It is a marvelous way to keep things fresh as, so long as you yourself are not a stagnant player who only runs one list, your regular opponents must treat each stealth marker as any possible threat from your list you have used in the past. Also on the changes to stealth front, I think the rule that stealth models' activations end if they are discovered while active is harsh but probably a good one to include. It will force stealth to be played more as a creeping/infiltrating mentality and less as a quake invulnerability power up.

Morale wording change - seems fine, but I have a question: is this wording here necessary given that falling damage has already been clarified not to cause morale checks? As it is, it seems that contagion rolls also do not cause morale checks. This is definitely an intentional change, but I'm not sure why this is the case. Is there a particular reason for this?

Overrun - Now with 100% less Overwatch! That's what I call consumer protection. Also an interesting change as it makes the charge action more valuable in some respects. You will have to think very carefully about charging as an option and the way charges can be used.

Beam - Better, but still not perfect. We've got some wording issues "model's" ... what? There seems to be a word missing here, either that or the apostrophe and s need to go away. The wording is a bit clunky. Why not define that a Beam weapon can only hit X potential targets as you're talking about whether a model is touched by the line? It would make more sense there since it's valuable information to have in hand, not dangling at the end.


Faction Profiles

The comparison/QR table right up front is a bit dense on the eyes but it's nice to have that information all in one place to make informed tactical decisions.

Unit entries - much cleaner, very easy on the eyes, AND WE FINALLY HAVE UPGRADE OPTIONS!

Can you tell I'm excited? We'll have a further post on that later. For now, just a few comments:

PMC - The director just got cheaper? What? The murder machine is in the house, apparently. The points break from not getting gravity mines and smoke grenades automatically does make sense, sort of, but it doesn't change the fact that he's still a heck of a bargain in the offensive power department. Recruits come in larger blocks, which is fantastic news, since we all know I like bringing numbers to the party. I think Veteran Medic, as a name, lacks punch even if it is sufficiently descriptive. It feels bland. The commando definitely needed a points break with the change in Stealth.

X'Lanthos - The points adjustments generally look good, the Lurkers are an interesting synergy piece, the Assassin got appropriately cheaper, which is good to see. Why no special gravitic mines across the board, and why the Commander with the option to take regular gravity and X'Lanthos gravitic mines? I suspect a formatting error.

Reclaimers - Gravity Jetpack name needs a bit of a rework but wow that rule is fun. Or, it would be if we knew what "Fly" does yet. I'm going to choose to assume it's awesome.

User avatar
miniwargaming
Site Admin
Posts: 2837
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 2:38 pm

Re: 0.4.1 Feedback

Post by miniwargaming » Mon Sep 17, 2012 8:40 pm

Great feedback as usual.

I'll see how much of it I can respond to:
cymruvoodoo wrote:Let's start with the website. Slick design, communicates well, but needs copy editing quite badly. Mistakes like "humanities" instead of the intended "humanity's" (one is a reference to social studies and the broad analysis of culture as expressed in literature, art, and philosophy, the other a possessive form of a proper noun.) on the "The Game" page make Dark Potential look like a bit more of a fly by night operation than the art, the miniatures, and the rules should prove. However, this is the alpha of the website as much as the rules and so I think for a first cut, this is very impressive. Clean up the spelling errors, clean up the grammar, and get a writer to tighten up the text and it'll be a fantastic showcase.
Yup, I agree. Feel free to make a post with all the mistakes you find.
cymruvoodoo wrote:New casualty removal rules! Very interesting. Up front, this removes some of the strategy which was present. Do I care? No way! Having to sit there while someone agonizes over which model to remove in order to try and mess up my plans in the middle of my turn is very silly and sometimes frustrating. I am not sure I agree with the way the rule is worded. Is there a particular reason to specify that the closest model to the source of the attack is removed regardless of line of sight? I think that it might be better, since we are working with TLoS in Dark Potential and quite a lot hinges on who can see whom in other circumstances, to specify that the closest visible models are removed first, followed by the closest non-visible models?
Not a bad idea. We'll have to playtest both to see what feels best.
cymruvoodoo wrote:Running! Very interesting as well. In some respects I think I liked the idea of move and move better but I can understand quite well how having run be a subset of move makes the mechanics flow more smoothly. I am a bit surprised, a bit concerned about the fact that stealth tokens cannot run. Given how mobile everything else can be to be cut down to a single basic movement is a big change from what stealth models used to be able to do.
Again, it needs to be playtested. From what playtesting we did the stealthed models always felt overpowered. We'll have to see how it pans out.
cymruvoodoo wrote:Flash grenades - a grenade that saps CP to represent disorientation? What a novel idea! Wish I'd thought of it. Nevertheless, this is a very interesting tool. It does raise some questions. First, what happens when a unit is subject to multiple flash grenades in the same round? Is it possible to loose more than one CP to being flashbanged (that sounds... so inappropriate. Must run Reclaimers now just so I can use that term constantly) in the same turn? What happens when a unit has no CP to loose? Is the flash grenade wasted? Is there a further non-CP penalty once the CP buffer is gone? Also, is there a good reason to specify "small base" instead of "grenade template" as with every other type of grenade? I think if you simply said "grenade template plus two inches" you would get the same as "small base plus three inches" and you would keep like things using like terminology and tools insofar as that's possible.
Yes, they can keep losing more CP (so keep tossing them at the Commanders!). I thought of having some penalty for those without CP (perhaps just a simple Morale test or break?), but once again it needs to be playtested.
cymruvoodoo wrote:Stealth Mind Games! I love 'em. Now, that's probably just me, but I revel in getting to slap down stealth counters, look my opponent in the eye, and dare him or her to guess what shenanigans I'm pulling this time around. It is a marvelous way to keep things fresh as, so long as you yourself are not a stagnant player who only runs one list, your regular opponents must treat each stealth marker as any possible threat from your list you have used in the past. Also on the changes to stealth front, I think the rule that stealth models' activations end if they are discovered while active is harsh but probably a good one to include. It will force stealth to be played more as a creeping/infiltrating mentality and less as a quake invulnerability power up.
My thoughts exactly.
cymruvoodoo wrote:Morale wording change - seems fine, but I have a question: is this wording here necessary given that falling damage has already been clarified not to cause morale checks? As it is, it seems that contagion rolls also do not cause morale checks. This is definitely an intentional change, but I'm not sure why this is the case. Is there a particular reason for this?
I purposefully clarified it in more than one area as it is easy to overlook rules that are only mentioned once.

Why the change? Because it felt better. ;)

These types of things are the things that could change with playtesting.
cymruvoodoo wrote:Overrun - Now with 100% less Overwatch! That's what I call consumer protection. Also an interesting change as it makes the charge action more valuable in some respects. You will have to think very carefully about charging as an option and the way charges can be used.
Exactly.
cymruvoodoo wrote:Beam - Better, but still not perfect. We've got some wording issues "model's" ... what? There seems to be a word missing here, either that or the apostrophe and s need to go away. The wording is a bit clunky. Why not define that a Beam weapon can only hit X potential targets as you're talking about whether a model is touched by the line? It would make more sense there since it's valuable information to have in hand, not dangling at the end.
I agree. I'll have to work on that wording, once I playtest it more.
cymruvoodoo wrote:PMC - The director just got cheaper? What? The murder machine is in the house, apparently. The points break from not getting gravity mines and smoke grenades automatically does make sense, sort of, but it doesn't change the fact that he's still a heck of a bargain in the offensive power department.
Once again those numbers will be adjusted as more playtesting is done.
cymruvoodoo wrote:Reclaimers - Gravity Jetpack name needs a bit of a rework but wow that rule is fun. Or, it would be if we knew what "Fly" does yet. I'm going to choose to assume it's awesome
Yeah I forgot to add the Fly rule. It's mainly what it sounds like (i.e. ignoring intervening models and terrain). It'll get added in 0.4.2.

cymruvoodoo
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 8:49 am

Re: 0.4.1 Feedback

Post by cymruvoodoo » Mon Sep 17, 2012 10:09 pm

Faction Feedback!

We'll start with the PMC, shall we? And a-one, and-a-two...

Director - As I've said before, got a points break and lost the equipment which came as standard, by and the large. I'm not convinced this is a change for the better since the laser rifle was what made the Director such a valuable piece to have anyway. Take other units to throw smoke, just park the Director somewhere with a good line of sight and let him light up anything he can see. The option to take a Vibro-knife is an interesting choice but I wouldn't ever take it, I don't think, as getting into melee is wasting the damage potential of his ranged weapon. Besides which, there are plenty of other tasty options for a toe to toe scrap and I'd rather put the points there. Since combats are not simultaneous, the Director's ability to stab someone in the face seems pretty irrelevant unless you want him to charge. If that were the case, I'd rather be able to not take the laser rifle and get a points break to take him with just a corporation rifle and the vibro-knife upgrade.

To boil that down, then: Director looks like there is a "no brainer" setup on paper which means something might be out of whack on the points-cost front.

Recruiter - Between the points bump and the fact that it doesn't come with free smoke any more, this is not such a no-brainer buy. That's definitely a good thing. It is still a sensible purchase to complement a Director, project a morale bubble, and hand out CP, but at least the CP aren't so free. The Recruiter will have to work to earn his place but I think he can pull his weight.

Arbitrator - Got a points break for the basic version but a points bump if you want him equipped as before. Either way, I don't think I'll take this profile to the party although it is pretty lethal on paper. You could, I suppose, run him as a forward commander with some Recruits and a Commando or two and that would be a serious threat. It could take pressure off of your back line because that kind of a combat group is something you can't afford to let arrive, not unless you're as good in melee or better. My concern at that point is that you're not going to have much of a back line to protect. Can they close quickly or steadily enough if there aren't additional threats to split fire? I am going to try list-building around the Arbitrator and see what I can come up with. Perhaps he will prove to be worth 60 points even without the smoke or grav mines.

Recruits - 30 for 4, plus the option to go all the way to eight in a squad? Yes please. I'll take two. Add smoke and go to town. What more can I say? The one problem I see is that with stacking squad bonuses, a full squad of eight can drop smoke and still be at RA18, effectively. With those sorts of stats you can afford to disrespect the odds since the odds are in your kitchen, making you a sandwich (as it were). Now, normally I've no problem with twisting the odds around your finger but think about what this represents? This means that recruits can start popping off shots at RB4+ at targets in cover and still knock them off. Unrealistic ranges? Nope. Not at this tabletop scale, not by a long shot. However, unrealistic use of volume of fire? Possibly. Game-breaking? Probably not, other units can benefit just as much or more and big units have problems of their own. It's just something to think about.

Corporate Agents - Points drop up front, lowered strength, and the option to add vibro-knives? Okay, this is different but positive, I think. It makes a PMC melee force much more viable since the Agents still bring rifles and can bring smoke to the party. Unlike a dedicated melee troop they can hang off and shoot well also. A strong choice. It's a little odd that their unit RA cannot get as high as the Recruits' but that's the power of putting a lot of shots downrange.

Sniper - More expensive and lost equipment. This is a cost increase I can get behind in light of the fact that dug in Defense 5 is going to be very untouchable. That's a minimum of -7 if the sniper is in only light cover. Only. Hah. More likely looking at -8 before range is factored in. Now, some squads, especially in their new larger sizes are still going to be able to reach out and touch that but the sniper is going to be a shot you must commit resources towards eliminating.

Heavy Weapons Specialist - More expensive, same kit, but the limit has been increased! On the whole, positive changes.

Medic - slightly more expensive, everything's the same, but there's now an option to make him a better healer. I don't know that the points bump is justified on this one. His defense is good but the healing ability is very limited in terms of its ability to do massive amounts. The sweet spot appears to be babysitting solos in the backfield to keep them topped up in a shootout.

Commando - Tiny points bump to get the smoke grenades, otherwise the same, nothing to see here except good stuff.

Surveyor - Good to see points on this, targeting can be very dangerous as an ability, it's nice for the PMC to have access to that. However, I think if the medic is 25 points the Surveyor should be at least the same if not more. Targeting is simply a much less situational and reactive ability than healing.

Technician - Now we're talking! This seems a very fair value given that the Technician has to take an action to deploy the thing. I do have one question - on the Emplacement Controller's second option, to fire "with" an emplacement, does he take over from the drone, with his worse RA, as a tradeoff for getting to use CP on the shot, or is he "squadding up" with the emplacement to give it a +1 RA buff?


Next up, the X'Lanthos

Commander - Cheaper, lost the gravity mines for free, but the points break more than makes up for that. This is a very welcome change on the whole.

Manipulator - Cheaper but does not come with the shielding. End result, no net change, because that shielding is very much a no-brainer.

Soldiers - Same cost, but now in new and improved larger packaging! Great stuff. Still a mainstay unit.

Shock Troops - with spray weapons and grav packs, still fairly dangerous and good scenario contesters, cost staying the same is fair.

Phase Troops - Points break is probably fair but I'm not sure they're something that will work its way into my lists very much even at the cheaper cost. The ability to shoot through the walls is good. I think I would rather take cheaper troops and just move to shoot around the walls.

Lurkers - Stealth squad with targeting, recon, and dug in? Tasty at most costs, Loner means they're not overpowered by any means and 40 points for two is very good. Reliable targeting is quite a force multiplier, and these might be undercosted. Have to keep a close eye on this.

Assassin - Needed a points drop with the change to Stealth, didn't really get one. That Phase Field Generator is a no-brainer piece of equipment. Perhaps drop the Assassin to 35 and bump the Phase Field Generator up to 15?

Infector - I don't necessarily want one all the time but this is a very interesting entry. With the up-front drop you can get some viral weapons into your force with some ease and then depending on how much you want to emphasize that or how many options you like to cover, spend points accordingly.

Guardian - Points drop is something I don't have an opinion on for the simple reason that I still don't have an opinion about the Guardian. It could be very useful but I'm still looking at effective synergies.


Reclaimers round out the stats and so they finish off here:

Captain - Same points, Beam weapon has been clarified a bit so that's better, and I still think he's overpriced. There's just no way, in my mind, that a Reclaimer Captain, even with Repulser (not a great Get out of Jail Free card despite what it looks like on paper) and high tech toys, should cost more than a PMC Director. Defense is lower, Armour is the same, perception's lower - how does the equipment difference justify a higher cost?

Warden - Seems fairly priced. Nice little commander option on the whole. Probably worth including the flash grenades and working him forward with an associated Reclaimer squad.

Reclaimers - Can we, before we do anything else, get a new name for this unit? "My Reclaimer Reclaimers are going to..." is just silly. Small squad size is a change here and likely a good one. It will help keep them honest. The points increase to get flash grenades and grav packs back is stiff, however.

Drop Guard - RA drop, 40 points for 3 is still as good or better a buy than the X'Lanthos Shock troops, against whom they are... roughly comparable. I still think they're going to be great scenario objective achievers. How will Gravity Jetpacks and Grav Packs interact if you have both?

Aegis Guard - Melee bump, not much to see here, still trying to work out the best use for the distortion field generator. There are times when it could be incredibly useful but I am not sure if the cost is too much for what will be, essentially, a sacrificial unit. I don't know exactly what it is they're going to be escorting into range - it might be a Reclaimer squad? More thought is required.

Field Platform Team - 40 points? That's a nice number, a very nice number indeed. I'll take my full allowance. They might ought to cost a little bit more.

Forward Observer - Points break is nice but again, targeting seems very valuable, especially in larger games, and I think this might be a little bit lowballed. Go for 35 points base with a 5 point Grav Pack upgrade?

Redeemer - At 50 points he will have to work hard to earn his points. AoE3, St7... that's not very impressive, especially with 8 inch range bands. The AoE does not remain in play, the being guided thing is fancy but all it does is allow you to negate cover and plink at a unit you cannot otherwise trace LoF towards cleanly. It might be a party piece but is it more than that? Is it something you can make part of a turn's strategy? I have trouble shaking my doubts.

Spectre - Again, at 50 points he's going to have to work very hard to earn his points back. It's not impossible but he's very pigeonholed into a couple of roles and looking at the rest of the list the Spectre is a very one-dimensional mind game. Which of the four tokens is he under, what's his real target? That's about it. Of course, one good det pack blast and the points will be repaid but do you build that into a strategy? I think I'd rather spend my points on other units at the moment, I feel like there's more bang for the buck.

ashan46
MiniWarGaming Beginner
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2012 11:35 pm

Re: 0.4.1 Feedback

Post by ashan46 » Mon Sep 17, 2012 11:32 pm

I personally agree with cyrum. about the Dark Potential update, with the game now nearing its beta stages.The website is amazing: It's visually pleasing and so far seems very slick. As for the revised rules, it is a major update. Sure the new rules for flashbangs and beam weapons and what not are still a bit sketchy, but a lot of the major flaws I encountered when I was trying out the early game versions seem to have been ironed out. Looking forward to see other updates on the rules. :)

User avatar
slaughtergames
MiniWarGaming Crazed Zealot
Posts: 532
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2011 3:37 pm
Location: Drenthe, Holland

Re: 0.4.1 Feedback

Post by slaughtergames » Tue Sep 18, 2012 9:59 am

I actually thought that the spectre was a pretty carn cool unit. but then, I'm saying cool, whereas you're saying tactics.... :) two good reads overall
"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!!"

cymruvoodoo
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 8:49 am

Re: 0.4.1 Feedback

Post by cymruvoodoo » Tue Sep 18, 2012 10:58 am

Hey, on cool factor, stealth 4 with grenade expert is definitely up there. Perhaps as not as cool as a unit with gravity jetpacks, or a unit with the ability to construct machine-gun turrets, but it's definitely cool.

User avatar
dragon1010
Silver Vault Member
Posts: 142
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 2:49 am
Location: RPI, probably doing homework

Re: 0.4.1 Feedback

Post by dragon1010 » Tue Sep 18, 2012 11:32 am

i cant find anything wrong with what cymru wrote. seems all sound to me. reading it before chem class lol. but yeah everything he said is sound. id like to see at least 2 playtests with these rules though before any major changes are made.
armies i play: tyranids (14000 pts), marines (4000 pts) orks (1750 pts) eldar (4000 pts) ig (3000 pts) lizardmen (2500 pts) high elves (3000 pts) cryx (100 pts) blindwater congregation (50 pts) trollbloods (25 pts) Legion of Everblight (50 pts)

l2k007
MiniWarGaming Beginner
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:49 am

Re: 0.4.1 Feedback

Post by l2k007 » Tue Sep 18, 2012 8:07 pm

So we will see the Repair and Fly Special rules coming in the next rule set?
Since I couldn't find the descriptions in 0.4.1.

User avatar
Sabet
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 207
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2012 7:09 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: 0.4.1 Feedback

Post by Sabet » Tue Sep 18, 2012 9:36 pm

Fly isn't in there, and I believe, though can't guarantee you, that Repair is Healing, but only works on non-organics (aka, Salvagers and Turrets)
The Beasts are rising...

Cyrmuvoodoo deserves a reward for the massive contribution to this game

User avatar
Phaedros
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 431
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2012 10:38 pm
Location: Fort Worth, TX

Re: 0.4.1 Feedback

Post by Phaedros » Wed Sep 19, 2012 5:16 pm

Great write-up yet again Cymru, you haven't lost your edge (heck I think it got better) over the past few months.

I personally can't say I really agree/disagree atm since I've been disconnected, however you haven't driven the car off the road in the past so I'm gonna nod and agree for now. =P

Also, Reclaimer Reclaimers... yes, new name plox, also X'Lanthos Soldiers, Corporate Agents (still feel just Agents would work fine), and Phase Troops (need something snazzy for these guys).
Warning! I have posted on your thread!
I'm not a Troll, I'm just lacking in the tact department, also, I tend to wield the English language like a really big sledgehammer. No offense is usually intended.

Crazy9
MiniWarGaming Beginner
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 5:26 pm

Re: 0.4.1 Feedback

Post by Crazy9 » Wed Sep 19, 2012 6:07 pm

to put my thaughts on this
Guardian - Points drop is something I don't have an opinion on for the simple reason that I still don't have an opinion about the Guardian. It could be very useful but I'm still looking at effective synergies.
the only idea i have had is the realy obveous ( forgive spelling) vortex and electron maser other wise i see it as a more of a manipulater pull people out of smoke and cover not much
next
Captain - Same points, Beam weapon has been clarified a bit so that's better, and I still think he's overpriced. There's just no way, in my mind, that a Reclaimer Captain, even with Repulser (not a great Get out of Jail Free card despite what it looks like on paper) and high tech toys, should cost more than a PMC Director. Defense is lower, Armour is the same, perception's lower - how does the equipment difference justify a higher cost?
i think you were a bit hared on this guy his wepon starts with D3 wounds and can be charged to stranth 8 with beam he can kill two soles at once if hes luky still you have to get him thier ithink its worth the points for the kill
Last edited by Crazy9 on Thu Sep 20, 2012 8:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

cymruvoodoo
MiniWarGaming Zealot
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 8:49 am

Re: 0.4.1 Feedback

Post by cymruvoodoo » Wed Sep 19, 2012 10:04 pm

Crazy9 wrote:
Captain - Same points, Beam weapon has been clarified a bit so that's better, and I still think he's overpriced. There's just no way, in my mind, that a Reclaimer Captain, even with Repulser (not a great Get out of Jail Free card despite what it looks like on paper) and high tech toys, should cost more than a PMC Director. Defense is lower, Armour is the same, perception's lower - how does the equipment difference justify a higher cost?
i think you were a bit hared on this guy his wepon starts with D3 wounds and can be charged to stranth 8 with beam he can kill to soles at once if hes luky still you have to get him thier ithink its worth the points for the kill
Well, on one hand, you have a point there. The Reclaimer Captain does bring RA 14 to the party, so nothing to sniff at. His weapon is native strength 6, native multiple wounds d3, and the native ability to hit up to two units. I certain;y can't and won't say any of that is bad. Moreover, the weapon has the ability to charge up to strength 8 every turn if you so desire. That means if the Captain can connect at all, you are quite correct, odds are he will mess up a solo something fierce. He is very CP efficient in terms of the number of rolls which need to fall his way in order to do damage.

There is a flip side to this, however. If the Captain shoots at a squad the most number of models he can clip out of that squad is two, and they have to be standing in a line relative to him. If the Captain wants to or needs to move in order to get a target, either that weapon is going to be strength 6 or he's taking a -2 RA penalty. On top of this, his beam weapon only has a 6" range increment.

Is that a big deal? Not entirely. Let's look at a few sample situations.

Captain, behind a low wall, spots a cluster of X'Lanthos soldiers around a valuable looking bit of machinery. They are, let's say, within 30 inches but not within 24. They are lined up nicely, all clustered on that objective, so he's got a shot at several targets, hopefully he'll hit two of them. He has a choice. The 7" move will get him inside another range bracket but it will cost him 2 strength.

If he doesn't move: -4 for the range, no cover (we'll say), and defense 3. Seven or less to hit each target, good odds but not great, without use of CP, assuming three possible targets touched by the lines, one should be hit for sure and with luck two. Assume a single CP is spent there, two soldiers are clipped at strength 8, odds to kill either of them is 90% individually, good odds they're both toast.

If he does move: -3 for the range, no cover, defense three, eight or less to hit, pretty good odds, again, assume a CP is spent to make sure two are hit. At strength 6, 50% chance to eliminate either target, one of them is down for sure, a CP will probably do for the other.

Alternate Move Option: -3 for the range, no cover, defense three, -2 penalty for moving with a charged shot means six or less to hit after the reduced range band, not great odds of connecting without a CP spent on each target. However, now we're back to the not-moving strength and good odds of a kill on both.

What does that show? Well, strength 8 is quite lethal, the choice between moving and holding still is going to come down to a decision about where the Captain needs to be more than anywhere else, since a CP will likely be required no matter what, and hidden in there is the fact that the Captain will never hit, and therefore have a chance at killing, more than two models a turn.

Let's just do a quick comparison. Same situation, replace the Captain with a Director. Still between 24 and 30 inches away, same setup. What now?

Not moving, no Sustained Beam adjustments: -3 for range, no cover, 3 defense, that's eight or less to connect and up to 3 can get hit. Assume at least one hits, otherwise a re-roll or a CP to bump the total down will provide the numbers. At strength 6, odds are that one soldier will be killed, possibly two even without a CP.

Not moving, drop a RoF to up the strength of the weapon. Same numbers as before but RoF 2 means lower rolls are less relevant and St7 means two soldiers might snuff it with no CP at all but one CP should guarantee that result according to the odds.

But... why not move? Now, with that 6" move, the Director should be inside the next range bracket. Now it's -2 for range, no cover, 3 defense, getting the RoF of the weapon to pay out is easier since you're looking for a nine to connect at all and odds are in your favor that you'll clip multiple targets at full strength. Spend that point of adjustment on Sustained Beam and once more you're looking at 66% odds of a killing on each roll you make.

So what's the takeaway? This situation is about as favorable to the Captain as I can make it and the Director is nearly as good. Why does it matter? Well, the Captain and the Director have essentially the same weapon except the Director's version has better range and cannot hit multiple units. What it can do, however, is hit multiple models in the same unit without them having to line up. It can even flip on to the exact same damage stat against a single solo - again, no, it can't then go on to clip another unit but against that first one the difference between the Captain and the Director is that the Director's gun has a better range. I think that the utility and potency of the Captain's Particle Beam should not be underestimated but does not deserve overestimation either. If the PMC director is fairly priced at 90 points then I find it difficult to believe that the Reclaimer Captain should be priced 10 points more dear with a stat line worse off in several places and such a very conditionally valuable weapon.

Crazy9
MiniWarGaming Beginner
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 5:26 pm

Re: 0.4.1 Feedback

Post by Crazy9 » Thu Sep 20, 2012 8:33 am

all good ideas and i know that the captian is weak agenst squads lowrange is a harming thing but its the same as the electron masser (note i do know it's not a great wepone) and thats still effective i see them like opposets I would never run my captian agenst a squad of units unless i had noting else to shoot at they are low pirority targets for him when you consider the 7/5 and 8/6 blasts they have
to go with your ex. lets say that a manipulater pulled the captian up in to range of an assassin who chared than asuming that he made his leadership and on his turn moved out of combat not garented but ether way he dies and the repuler will help him get out so on the off chance he survives he has a chance of melting the assassin in close range at st 6 and mabe even hit the manipulater if he move to the right positon un likely to hurt it or hit but this was far from a faverobale ingagment with a lot of asumptions the piont thugh is st6 isnt bad 8s just better and he makes a nice overwacth canadate
but i do very much agree with your statment he would be a huge cp sink

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest