Wiouds wrote:I still do not why should that 1 squad member should act differently than the rest of the squad? I feel that thing give an unfair extra action to the squad. If I had the sapper skill on a solo, that solo would not have the ability to move, attack and place a bomb.
Where does the extra action come from?
9 man squad moves and goes into over watch
1 Solo moves and places a bomb
Total 10 Actions
10 Man squad moves.
9 Men go into overwatch
1 man sets a bomb
Total 10 actions
The way I'm seeing it ten actions is still ten actions. Where do you see the sapper attacking and placing a bomb in the same turn? Are you envisioning a different scenario?
Wiouds wrote:Also, it seem to me that the single squad member that act different from the rest of the squad would be better off as a solo or in a small squad with the same skill. Something that is better made for the task at hand.
That is intentional. Right now with the way the game works, solos, half-squad and the like are VERY powerful. The group with more activations is almost always going to win. Suppressions, the lack of "scoring" units, overwatch and cover all massively favor small squads or solos over lager squads. As such, solos and half squads should be rare instead of the norm. The value of one member being added to a squad is very small, the value of an activation is huge. If sappers can only be run solo or in dedicated squads, that means you'll almost never see them unless they are extremely powerful to justify their cost over a sniper or similar solo unit.
Unless DP evolves some of its core mechanics (which is might) to decrease the importance of squad activations a large number of solos isn't going to be a very attractive option. If that happens, than the benefits of squad specialists really drops way below the virtue of simplicity in design. At the moment however the game rules favor activations and in that environment squad specialists thrive.
If you really think the solo or small squad road is the way to go, we need to develop a rule set that doesn't make an activations a trump card unto themselves which probably means restricting suppression to a special ability (like the sniper has) and a full squad benefit. However that still doesn't deal with its counterpart overwatch which a lot of solo units can easy defeat (particularly if the solo has reliable defense), but triggering it and than leaving the overwatch squad open to attack giving the solo powerful board control tools vs a more squad heavy player. And those are just the two biggest offenders. Still I think it would have benefits outside of our narrow conversation here so it might be worth bringing up when the time is right.
Still that aside, as I've pointed out before design space is one of specialists virtues which you seem to ignore or at least under value. You can do so much more by having solos, small squads, blanket squad abilities, and specialists. Again, lets look at Sappers. They don't fit in solo because they aren't valuable enough to pay the point cost for a squad activation compared to snipers since the sapper is more situational than a sniper and small squads suffer the same problem unless we give the squad more utility to justify their cost, having all members of a squad be sappers is just way to much and could cause some serious cheese game play. So without specialists we're very restricted on a sapper design space.
There are lots of similar abilities which just are too situational to be a solid solo or small squad power but don't fit as a blanket squad power either. Without the specialist option we're given a much more narrow design area to work as only the most game changing or consistent abilities will be viable unless we can blanket them to an entire squad. While it is true specialists will add squad rules, without them you'll end up with more complex ability rules to try and work abilities which fit naturally on a specialist into a blanket powers or solo ability.
Wiouds wrote:I do not see a point in squad members having different abilities when you look at what little that it could add to the game and the cost that it would take to add it to the game. We are talking action/activation splitting, more rules for squad creation, and squad members abilities tracking during play when we can handle it by making their to different squad. It seem to just add one or two noncombat action to a squad.
See you keep say "little" and again I've rattled off a list twice as long as the negatives you keep listing several time and you don't even comment on half of it.
Squad creation rules will be minorly affected at best and given that almost all war gamers are used to having mixed squad from Warhammer, that doesn't really seem like it would impact the game at all.
And squad member ability tracking really also doesn't apply unless we foolishly make some power that require a lot of tracking. The much used example of sappers doesn't create any tracking of that sort what so ever. Why would it be more difficult to look at a model in a squad vs a model that is solo and recall what it does?
Action splitting by contrast is an issue, but I really don't see a negative impact again unless we foolishly made abilities with rules that create those problems. Action splitting itself is a fairly simple concept.
Again the only negative here is complexity, and complexity is a cumulative thing in game design. Unless something is so extremely obtuse as to be unplayable complexity is about the over all game. That is a question we really can't answer until Matt moves off the fluff and starts working on the mechanical side of things. If faction mechanics become a dense focus of the game for example, than simpling other areas make sense cause we don't want squad management to become a snarl with all those other rules. Right now however the very uniform nature of the rules makes the burden of squad management very small again unless we're foolish enough to make powers which are a burden on the player.
Wiouds wrote:Another problem I can see coming up is how we handle squad cover values. Magic cover is where the entire squad gets cover if only haft the squad is in cover. (I don’t have a better name for it) Then the targeted player can pick was squad members will be removed. This makes hitting the wanted target would be much harder for the attacker.
Why is that a bad thing? It should be hard for the attacker to hit the wanted target. That is why snipers were invented.
Wiouds wrote:If we use reasonable cover. I call it reasonable cover because squad member will use the most reasonable cover. I have been play testing with reasonable cover and found the attacker have a good deal of control over what target squad members
So than what is the issue in this scenario?