Replies to some Feedback

DBDraftDBDraft Posts: 104Administrator
edited August 2016 in Feedback & Gameplay
What does an Infantry Card represent?

An Infantry card is a group of multiple teams that are bought together. For example a Snowtrooper Platoon (Skill 2) costs 10 points. This Platoon has 4 individual infantry teams. The infantry stats are shown on the card. The infantry of the same Platoon can add their Attack values together as well as the Health values. So a Platoon of 4 Snowtrooper teams has Attack 4, Defense 2, Health 4, Armor 1. When this Platoon suffers damage you simply remove an infantry per uncanceled damage they take.

Comments have been made that the infantry card may be confusing as the stats are just for one team. Although this is true it is explained on the card and it is generally easier to add the Attack value together for the teams remaining to determine the combined Attack value of the Platoon as a whole.
Teams in the same Platoon operate together and use the same order but do not need to strictly stay within a certain range of each other. If teams are shooting at targets at different ranges then roll those at different ranges separately. Teams of the same Platoon can shoot at different targets.

When a Platoon takes damage then the owning player can choose which teams are removed as casualties. However only teams that are in range of the firer are eligible targets.

Why have a Rally Test to remove stress, why not just have green maneuvers for infantry?


X-Wing has a well known "stress" mechanic whereby stress tokens can be removed by performing green maneuvers. While this may seem to be suitable for all units in the game it does not best represent different skill levels of training for infantry which are important in combat. The "suppression" rules mean that infantry are actually more resilient in combat as enemy units cannot convert focus results to hits against infantry. However the infantry will gain stress from these suppression hits and become less likely to perform movement and shooting orders. So a new test is required to remove infantry stress, rather than one based solely on movement. The test can potentially remove multiple stress tokens. This is a fairly well known test for those people who have played other wargames.
Therefore the Rally test is a way of distinguishing between highly skilled and motivated troops and untrained militia. Infantry with stress tokens are limited in the orders they can use. The ability to remove stress is highly advantageous with good quality troops.

Why are there so many rules for different situations, ie: infantry vs infantry, infantry vs ships, ships vs vehicles etc...?

At first it may look like there are many different situations covered in the rules.... and you are right. But there are really only 2 main themes: infantry vs infantry and infantry vs vehicles (+ ships). The scale of the weapons used by infantry and vehicles are the main reason. In general infantry need critical results to damage vehicles and ships as their weapons are much weaker than ship based weapons. So we have covered all situations separately but they have a common theme which is consistent. Thematic rules also dictate that certain weapons like ion weapons should have a greater affect on vehicles and no real affect on living troops.

Armor looks to be too powerful at stopping damage.

Compared to Shields which can be lost and are not easily if ever regained, Armor always can limit damage to some degree. However most ground units have very low Defense values so are much easier to hit. Also critical hits ignore Armor as well as secondary attacks by missiles and torpedoes. So Armor is a limiting factor but not invulnerable. Infantry however will struggle to damage Armored vehicles with shooting unless they can get close enough to assault.

What about rules for terrain?

Terrain rules are something that will be added. In general these will be Line of Sight (LOS) blocking terrain features for ground units but aerial units will have the option of flying over them at higher altitude or risk passing over them at low altitude if they are attempting strafing runs. Area terrain (ie: Forests) will allow ground units to receive defensive bonuses if they are within them.

Anything else?

We have tried to be as thorough as we can with these rules to cover all likely situations that could occur in ground combat. We are certainly open to hearing your thoughts on the rules or suggestions for new upgrades etc....

Please try the Introductory Missions which are designed to showcase the new rules and should only take 30-45 mins to do.

·

Comments

  • yenamyenam Posts: 8Member, Tester
    Personally I like the way infantry works, but I also play Dust warfare which has some complex infantry mechanics. My main suggestion to some of the questions I have seen is use common sense. If you are attacking a platoon that is split up with 2 teams on one side of the map and 2 on the other side and you get 4 uncancelled hits then you can only remove the 2 teams you can target.
    some other suggestions which kind of come from my Dust Warfare experience:
    1) Infantry attacking at range 1 and range 2: roll attach dice equal to total team count and reroll any dice of your choice equal to the teams at range 1: IE. 2 teams at range 1 and 2 teams at range 2, roll 4 dice and change any 2.
    2A) When infantry is defending with at least 1 unit at range 3: Attacker gets any perks it would get for range 1 or range 2 if applicable. Defending infantry gets 1 extra defense die total. If more than 1 team is at range 3 defender only gets 1 extra defense die.
    2B) instead of rule 2A: if at least half the teams are at range 3 (rounded up) then defender gets 1 extra die. IE 2 teams at range 1 and 2 teams at range 3 then defender will get 1 extra defense die.
    * you could also make it a rule that the closest targets have to be removed first, or targets not at range 3 have to removed first.
    3)Target Lock on infantry
    a) Only allow for ordnance (missles, torps, etc). Infantry is small and should be hard to hit, however, will this make infantry too
    strong?
    b) If you target lock 1 team, then you should be able to reroll the attack dice and the results should apply to all the teams within
    range and firing arc - I.E. an AT-AT at range 2 rolls 2 hits and 2 misses, spends target lock and gets 4 hits. Infantry 3 teams are
    at range 3 and 1 out of range. 3 teams are destroyed.



    ·
  • DBDraftDBDraft Posts: 104Administrator
    edited August 2016
    It was never envisioned that people would want to split up a platoon and separate them as they only gain a real benefit when they combine their attacks together. That being said there may be reasons people want to try this so yes I agree, apply common sense for casualty removal.

    Having infantry teams at different ranges could be resolved the way you suggest for their shooting, but most games I have played would say you roll the attack dice separately after announcing "These attacks are for the range 2 teams.... and these are for the range 1 teams that I can reroll", then combine the resulting hits together. Net result is rolling 4 dice and having the option of rerolling 2 but it is best to assign these first.

    If some infantry teams are at range 2 while the others are at range 3 then the target would not get the benefit of being at range 3, as some teams are easier to hit. So an "all or nothing" approach may be easiest to rule on. Again this should encourage players to keep their infantry together so stray teams do not "give away" the position of the entire platoon. This would also apply for a platoon having 3 teams in a forest but 1 team outside of the forest. The team outside is the easier target and therefore removes the defensive advantage of those teams in the forest. This would keep things fairly clearly defined as "resolve the attack against the easiest valid target".

    Target Locking infantry is possible but is best seen as targeting the area occupied by the infantry. Ordnance like missiles and torpedoes can select an infantry team as their target but unless they have "secondary splash damage" like assault missiles they can only kill the team they hit. Cluster missiles can attack twice so they could engage a second team if it is nearby (within fire arc and range of missile).

    This generally makes missile and torpedoes a poor choice for attacks on infantry as they have high attack dice but only one target to kill. This makes sense as these weapons are primarily designed to kill vehicles and ships with high armor penetration warheads, something which is wasted on scattered infantry diving for cover.
    Target Locks for primary weapon attacks on infantry would work as you describe in 3b, only teams that are valid targets can be hit, excess hits are lost.

    Thanks for the feedback.
    ·
  • yenamyenam Posts: 8Member, Tester
    I agree with not splitting the infantry. I will probably house rule that teams need to stay within X inches of each other. Maybe I'll make 1 team a platoon leader and the other teams have to stay within X inches of the platoon leader - like Dust Warfare. We'll see. I like the idea of infantry not getting the extra defense die if any are within range 2 or less. That's basically what I meant with the * note. I misunderstood your explanation of target lock in your reply to Allien and thought you were stating target lock, as used to reroll dice, could only target 1 team which didn't make sense to me. But you meant for targeting with ordnance, which does make sense.
    in a few minutes I'm going to get the AT-AT's out and play test those :)
    ·
  • yenamyenam Posts: 8Member, Tester
    edited August 2016
    TIL The rebels have NO ground forces that can even dent an AT-AT!!!! And I loved it. I just about doubled the rebels points against 2 AT-AT's, 2 AT-ST's and 1 regular snow trooper platoon. AT-ST's went down relatively easily. snow troopers went down pretty fast after disembarking. P-Tower's went down way to easily to the AT-AT's barrage, but thematically I think that's pretty accurate!! You weren't kidding when you said the AT-AT's are beasts and they should be. I didn't bring any ships in yet. Any chance you could tell me what stats you are thinking for the snowspeaders? I'd like to do a test run with those, but I can just add other ships too. a couple questions and I apologize if you have answered these somewhere. I did search first

    1) When moving a ground unit, is it legal to place the template to see where its position will be and then change it? Or do we need to
    declare our move and then set the template? I came across a situation where I wanted to go straight with the AT-AT and realized I
    was going to bump the other AT-AT
    2) Range 1 and target lock. are the rules for rerolling the dice the same as the core game? So we wouldn't be able to reroll 4 dice
    because of range 1 and the reroll any of those dice again for target lock?

    Having a lot of fun testing this game.
    ·
  • DBDraftDBDraft Posts: 104Administrator
    A simple rule for infantry unit spacing could be the infantry movement distance (3 cm) from each other.

    The P-Towers can hurt an AT-AT as they have a good chance at rolling a critical result (converting focus to a critical and using TL to get rerolls) which will always bypass armor. They also shoot before the AT-AT but yes the AT-AT can then blow them away quite easily. However a battery of 4 could conceivable seriously damage an AT-AT over 3 or 4 rounds of shooting. Therefore 48 points of P-Tower are competitive against 40 points of AT-AT.

    Trial Snowspeeder basic stats would be:
    Primary Weapon: 2
    Agility: 2
    Hull: 3
    Shields: 0
    Actions: Focus, Evade
    It has a front primary fire arc and a 180 degree rear arc for a unique "turret" upgrade.

    Regarding movement and template usage I would say it is good practice to declare your intention first. Bumping is a part of the X-Wing rules and so it is an acceptable risk. Ground units with more freedom of movement like infantry can more easily avoid these situations but an AT-AT is more limited in the areas it can go.
    At range 1 ALL ground units get to reroll attack dice and do not gain +1 attack like ships. So an AT-AT at range 1 gets 4 attack dice with rerolls without needing a TL.

    Cool to hear you are having fun with this, I think taking it one step at a time and introducing a new unit as you go is the best way to understand the mechanics and find situations that need clarification or improvement.
    ·
  • yenamyenam Posts: 8Member, Tester
    I played a couple games with all elements (ships, vehicles, infantry, missiles, bombs, etc). I even threw in a trench rule. I had a blast playing with all this together and definitely recommend it. I did have to reference the rules quite a bit, which is expected with anything new, and I'm ok with that. I really want to find a good way of showing ships flying over the ground forces. Since I only printed out the ground forces on paper, I was able to easily put the ship stands on the paper. It did get a little clumsy when I had 2 ships on at AT-AT and the AT-AT had to move. My plan is to print out the templates, glue them to mat board, and then glue figures on top. I might print some extra templates and glue to mat board without gluing figures and that I could use when ships fly over. This would be similar to Wings of Glory, where you remove the ship and base and place a card with the same side base. It will get messy, so I may just go with the rules as written.

    Thoughts:
    1) AT-AT are still beasts which they should be! torpedoes did well against them as they should.
    2) AT-AT's seemed too powerful VS ships though. I think it should be harder to hit air units from the ground.
    3) Maybe I just got lucky with rolling crits, but infantry seemed to do too much damage to ships. Perhaps take away the range 1 reroll when infantry attacks ships? Maybe do that for all ground units.
    4) I think infantry should be able to attack a ship that is touching its base since infantry should be agile enough to shoot straight up.
    5) I assume there will be anti-Armor, and Anti-Air upgrades for infantry?
    6) DF9 feels too weak against infantry.


    Questions:
    1) For a close assault, does an AT-AT need to have the defender in its front arc? I played that it did as that makes sense to me. For example the AT-AT turned and pushed 2 infantry teams with its side. To me that should not be considered a close assault. The infantry can close assault from the sides or rear, but that AT-AT shouldn't. Perhaps add an upgrade to the AT-AT that has side/rear port guns, or something.
    2) Are you planning any upgrades to ships for enhancing air-ground attacks, something like air-ground targeting system, add 1 attack die, or ground units can't add defense die at range 3.

    I don't know if my thoughts are accurate since I only played 2 games and that isn't enough information to draw final conclusions on stats. Its entirely possible I just got lucky and rolled a lot of crits with my infantry. Again, adding ships to this really increased my enjoyment. The Tie Fighters flying past my X,Y,Z screen to strafe the rebels defensive front was cool. Likewise the X,Y,Z attacking an AT-AT, forcing the troops to disembark well before they intended to, but before the AT-AT blew up was fun. It gave my DF9 turrets something to shoot at! I can't wait for the missions!
    ·
  • DBDraftDBDraft Posts: 104Administrator
    edited August 2016
    OK I will try to cover everything, it sounds like you are following the rules as they were intended to be!

    1) AT-AT are still beasts which they should be! torpedoes did well against them as they should.
    Good assessment, secondary ordnance attacks are their bane.

    2) AT-AT's seemed too powerful VS ships though. I think it should be harder to hit air units from the ground.
    Well they are unable to use focus results when shooting at any unit (other than infantry) so only hitting ships on damage or critical results, and ship gets +1 agility, so they are not that powerful. Also a limited fire arc and lack of turning makes them less useful.

    3) Maybe I just got lucky with rolling crits, but infantry seemed to do too much damage to ships. Perhaps take away the range 1 reroll when infantry attacks ships? Maybe do that for all ground units.
    You must have been rolling very well to score more than 1 critical hit, then ships get their standard Agility dice to cancel so they would be lucky to do a critical on average. The range 1 reroll is very useful but it keeps the rules consistent with other shooting by ground units.

    4) I think infantry should be able to attack a ship that is touching its base since infantry should be agile enough to shoot straight up.
    Again, being consistent with the basic X-Wing rules means you cannot shoot something in contact "even if flying overhead". But it is highly likely that only 1 team is in contact so the other teams are free to shoot.

    5) I assume there will be anti-Armor, and Anti-Air upgrades for infantry?
    I recently saw a movie trailer... this guy fired a portable missile launcher at a huge 4 legged machine....

    6) DF9 feels too weak against infantry.
    Their 2 attack dice is not great but they can engage infantry at long range and score suppression hits to slow them down. They are at least a cheap defensive unit and have useful air attack.

    Questions:
    1) For a close assault, does an AT-AT need to have the defender in its front arc? I played that it did as that makes sense to me. For example the AT-AT turned and pushed 2 infantry teams with its side. To me that should not be considered a close assault. The infantry can close assault from the sides or rear, but that AT-AT shouldn't. Perhaps add an upgrade to the AT-AT that has side/rear port guns, or something.
    Under the rules it only requires contact to be made to close assault regardless of facing. The AT-AT is able to fight anything in contact with it's base as it stomps over them.

    2) Are you planning any upgrades to ships for enhancing air-ground attacks, something like air-ground targeting system, add 1 attack die, or ground units can't add defense die at range 3.
    Ships already have a wealth of upgrades available. We are thinking however that the wording on upgrades should be strictly observed. So if an upgrade mentions "ships" this is a keyword that only applies to ships, not vehicles or infantry. Obviously the rules were not intended to include vehicles or infantry but it helps to clear up a lot of problems if we stick to this idea. I personally do not think ships need any extra help attacking slower, less agile ground units. New cards could always be added, even by players if they want to suggest them. But generally I would say there are enough tools for ships to use at present. More tools to help ground units combat ships would be more desirable. So Turbolaser turrets, missile batteries etc.... could be coming soon.

    Using the 2D ground units could allow you to house rule ship movement so that they could land on top of the ground unit and not be forced to move, this might work well. So as long as both sides agree to do this it may be a good alternative rule.
    ·
  • yenamyenam Posts: 8Member, Tester
    DBDraft said:


    Questions:
    1) For a close assault, does an AT-AT need to have the defender in its front arc? I played that it did as that makes sense to me. For example the AT-AT turned and pushed 2 infantry teams with its side. To me that should not be considered a close assault. The infantry can close assault from the sides or rear, but that AT-AT shouldn't. Perhaps add an upgrade to the AT-AT that has side/rear port guns, or something.
    Under the rules it only requires contact to be made to close assault regardless of facing. The AT-AT is able to fight anything in contact with it's base as it stomps over them.

    .

    I understand what you are saying, but infantry should be agile enough to get out of the way of the AT-AT's "foot". I don see how thematically and AT-AT can assault from its side which is the reason infantry, or AT-ST's should be around to protect the AT-AT from flank and rear assaults. Just sharing my opinions. As for keeping the rules consistent, I didn't really think about that. I don't mind complicated rules, but I understand this game isn't one of those games.
    ·
  • DBDraftDBDraft Posts: 104Administrator
    I know what you mean, this is just the easiest way to say whether something is in assault or not. The close assault can only kill teams that are in contact, so it is quite likely some teams will not be in physical contact with the base and therefore cannot be removed as casualties in close assault, so if only 1 team is in contact and the AT-AT does 4 hits only that 1 team will die.

    You mentioned rules for trenches, I would like to hear your ideas. These could be terrain features that help infantry survive assaults and/or shooting.
    ·
  • yenamyenam Posts: 8Member, Tester
    edited August 2016
    I didn't do anything in depth for the trenches. I did a Take Cover action, but allowed them to shoot using the overwatch rule. I debated on giving them 2 additional defense dice - 1 for overwatch and 1 for take cover, but I ended up using just one extra die with the evade from take cover. Since I made both platoons support platoons, they both had 2 Medium repeating blasters. Throwing 6 attack dice while still being able to use take cover, seemed to work pretty well. For infantry assault the trenches didn't do anything and I didn't allow AT-AT assaults in the trenches. I thought about removing the take cover benefit once a vehicle got within range 1.
    As for moving in the trench, I still gave them the take cover benefit, but they wouldn't get overwatch benefit
    ·
  • Ugly_LeaderUgly_Leader Posts: 1Member, Tester
    Hi,

    I just found your homepage & rules and I'm looking forward to give them a try. I have an army of micro machines itching to join my X-Wing fights!
    When will the Snowspeeder rules come to the rescue of the rebellion? I saw the stats above. What about the movement dial?



    ·
  • DBDraftDBDraft Posts: 104Administrator
    The snowspeeder rules will be coming along shortly, basic stats are:
    Attack: 2
    Agilty: 2
    Hull: 3
    Shields: 0

    Focus, Evade
    Upgrades: "Turret"

    The movement dial is somewhat like a Z-95/Y-Wing/X-Wing. Nothing too fancy.

    If you can understand all of the new rules first it will help, but feel free to ask questions!
    ·
  • Awing_PilotAwing_Pilot Posts: 5Member, Tester
    The snowspeeder is one of my all time favorite ships. Since the new wave of ships in X-wing has the TIE Striker I'll try out the snowspeeders (when I get some) with that movement dial, I'll keep all the other stats the same for now.
    ·
  • DBDraftDBDraft Posts: 104Administrator
    Totally agree... the speeder is a cool design. :)

    The trickiest rules are the Turret upgrades such as the Tow Cable. We do have some ideas for this that may get "leaked" here....
    ·
Sign In or Register to comment.