|
TheChirurgeon posted:But just so we're clear, if they do keep shots that explode and hit an area of effect within x inches of a target spot, templates are a much better way to check this on the table than spinning a tape measure. I mean come on Yeah, I agree. That's a clear step back from templates imo
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 17:19 |
|
|
TheChirurgeon posted:positioning is a pretty big deal in the non-GW games I've played. Hell, X-wing is super-precise about it, especially when you start doing poo poo like barrel rolls. X-Wing? You mean the game where FFG said "tape measuring is loving stupid" and provides maneuver templates to take out ambiguity?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 01:06
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:X-Wing? You mean the game where FFG said "tape measuring is loving stupid" and provides maneuver templates to take out ambiguity? Template bad. Measure good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
Hixson posted:Template bad. Measure good. FFG Good, GW Bad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 01:06
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:X-Wing? You mean the game where FFG said "tape measuring is loving stupid" and provides maneuver templates to take out ambiguity? Templates don't really remove ambiguity though. My friends play a lot of warmahordes and that game is stuffed with official and third party templates and movement aids and it encourages players to be incredibly pedantic about facing and positioning.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
Hixson posted:Template bad.  Forums Poster Hixson just has faced Ironfire one too many times.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
kingcom posted:FFG Good, GW Bad. I respect your opinion. But I disagree  . They're both fine companies; but GW is better!
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 01:10
|
|
|
tallkidwithglasses posted:Templates don't really remove ambiguity though. My friends play a lot of warmahordes and that game is stuffed with official and third party templates and movement aids and it encourages players to be incredibly pedantic about facing and positioning. I don't think you understand how X-Wing works if you think their template movement system doesn't remove ambiguity.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 01:11
|
|
|
Hixson posted:Template bad. Measure good. - A obtuse fucker, TYOOL 2017
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 01:12
|
|
|
Templates are easily the worst thing about x-wing, next to stacks of tokens. It would be nice if more minis games just had simple hex maps so you definitely know what facing and position things were in. Even then, you have people complaining about how to draw lines from corner to corner in imperial assault because "it isn't realistic" or some other lovely reason.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
Xarbala posted:Yeah, I agree. That's a clear step back from templates imo Yeah same. tallkidwithglasses posted:Templates don't really remove ambiguity though. My friends play a lot of warmahordes and that game is stuffed with official and third party templates and movement aids and it encourages players to be incredibly pedantic about facing and positioning. Yeah. Everything I've read about Warmahordes makes me not want to play it. Another straw on the pile. It's a shame because I like the aesthetic of some of the Hordes stuff. Crackbone posted:X-Wing? You mean the game where FFG said "tape measuring is loving stupid" and provides maneuver templates to take out ambiguity? The movement cardboard things help a lot but yeah X-Wing is really fiddly. Especially if you're playing on a smooth 3x3 mat. When playing with my brother we both found that it was really easy to accidentally brush a ship with the cuff of a sleeve and suddenly instead of being able to maneuver past an asteroid you're going to crash into it. I had a wild idea of using a 3x3 fuzzy mat and sticking velcro to the bottom of all the ship stands and asteroids and stuff, but I also have a weird aversion to messing with my pristine, new game pieces so I dunno. I bet it would work OK.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:- A obtuse fucker, TYOOL 2017 I just don't like playing the .001" game with templates in particular. Tape measures are fine though. I don't know why this is controversial.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:I don't think you understand how X-Wing works if you think their template movement system doesn't remove ambiguity. I wasn't talking about xwing, I was talking about my experiences with templates and how they generally seem to incentivize the positional nitpicking I think everyone agrees is a source of frustration in tabletop miniatures games.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:I don't think you understand how X-Wing works if you think their template movement system doesn't remove ambiguity. I agree with Leperflesh on this one--it's insanely easy to bump a ship, especially when you're trying to push a template up to the base of a ship. It's not a rare occurrence during a game that someone trying to line up the template accidentally bumps the ship, and then the precision becomes an issue. Likewise, it's not like you don't have a lot of room to maneuver when it comes to barrel rolls and template placement there, or when it comes to shooting distances and firing arcs. I like X-Wing, but it's not like their template system doesn't come with its own quirks and annoyances. Hell, for my TIE swarm most of the challenge in the game is based on eyeballing distances so I don't bump into my own goddamn ships rather than making tactical decisions about where to go or what to shoot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 01:33
|
|
|
The plastic templates you win in x-wing events have about a 1-1.5mm leeway between the ship guides so the ships will start drifting over the course of the game even with precise measurement. The railroading system used to determine bumps also leaves a lot of room for ambiguity. I play it regardless but all war games should honestly be on hexes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 01:40
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Templates are easily the worst thing about x-wing, next to stacks of tokens. It would be nice if more minis games just had simple hex maps so you definitely know what facing and position things were in. Even then, you have people complaining about how to draw lines from corner to corner in imperial assault because "it isn't realistic" or some other lovely reason. Look at this bad opinion and savour it like a stinky cheese. As a reformed 40k player the X-wing movement templates are awesome. No bullshit when it comes to where your ships end up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 02:11
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:The plastic templates you win in x-wing events have about a 1-1.5mm leeway between the ship guides so the ships will start drifting over the course of the game even with precise measurement. The railroading system used to determine bumps also leaves a lot of room for ambiguity. I play it regardless but all war games should honestly be on hexes. Squares are like objectively better than hexes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 02:13
|
|
|
Raged posted:Look at this bad opinion and savour it like a stinky cheese. The problem is that there is a fair amount of bullshit? As mentioned, accidental movement is very common, and any time a template overlaps another ship things get fairly hairy e: panascope posted:Squares are like objectively better than hexes. now this, this is a wrong opinion
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 02:13
|
|
|
panascope posted:Squares RIP Warhammer Fantasy
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
Just use computers to resolve things, gosh.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
Who you callin a square?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 02:31
|
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:now this, this is a wrong opinion ??? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
much like x-wing, a good game despite some rather unfortunate design decisions
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
In gaming companies being terrible news, WotC just banned a card in standard a couple hours ago, three days after the regularly scheduled banned and restricted list announcement. Friends on Facebook are pissed because they had just bought into the deck impacted by the banning because they figured it was safe after the B&R list update. Meanwhile, GW is bad for offering refunds on recent rulebook purchases.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 02:54
|
|
|
However from what has been going around they are picky what qualifies. Gathering storm is not applicable apparently. 42 days.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 03:00
|
|
|
tallkidwithglasses posted:Meanwhile, GW is bad for offering refunds on recent rulebook purchases. Store credit. GW isn't bad for doing that, but it's certainly not the nicest thing they could have done either. By way of comparison, I think the community has known for about six months that Dark Age is getting a new edition and that it's only a minor tweak to the current (2013) rules plus the later errata/revisions. The new 2017 rules should be out sometime in the summer, I believe. Because of CMoN's communication, people can be confident that any army books they buy now will remain current in the new edition even though the rules themselves are always free online. The main rulebook will obviously be out of date, but as I've mentioned before, you can exchange any old edition for the current one if you see them at a con. (I wouldn't be surprised to see Outcasts updated sometime next year or so though, since they got updated just before the game switched to pricing units in 25-point increments.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 03:07
|
|
|
Soulfucker posted:Some of my worries include how they're going to handle cutting down playtime with regards to damage allocation (which is bad right now) and random movement (the worst). At least they're handling this better than the AoS launch (which isn't saying much that was awful) with some actual community outreach and something resembling rules previews? I guess they'll have an answer out pretty soon. This is another woeful lost oppotunity. It would be a ton faster if 8 lasguns did X damage and you just rolled for the last two in the unit or w/e to minimise bucket of dice syndrome. Can you tell I played IG? Hixson posted:Soooo precise positioning makes precise positioning less important?? It's the difference between micro and macro positioning. I'm not hugely interested in microing units in a 'beer and pretzels' table top wargame (or, really, ever), but it would be nice if macro unit positioning mattered a lot more. Again, using the IG example, they are presented as the WWII army of fire and movement. Tactics for infantry and towed guns like reverse slope defences, ambushes and keyhole firing positions just.. don't exist. Hell, fire and movement doesn't even exist in a game in which an army is presented as the army of fire and movement. That could be fine, I mean it's a sci fi wargame not a WWII simulator.. but there are no alternative replacements. The big macro decision is how far do you stand back to avoid being assaulted. There is literally no coordinated tactical movement in the game. It might be partly that the average table doesn't have enough terrain or isn't big enough for the scale as well (also that the scale in 40k is stupid), this is a complex issue. Cthulhu Dreams fucked around with this message at 03:25 on Apr 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 03:15
|
|
|
gently caress I loved those games, so much time spent playing those. I haven't kept up with handheld gaming for years, but did they stop making advanced wars games?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
Black_Nexus posted:gently caress I loved those games, so much time spent playing those. Yes it's the Epic: Armageddon of Nintendo games
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 04:10
|
|
|
tallkidwithglasses posted:In gaming companies being terrible news, WotC just banned a card in standard a couple hours ago, three days after the regularly scheduled banned and restricted list announcement. Friends on Facebook are pissed because they had just bought into the deck impacted by the banning because they figured it was safe after the B&R list update. They can both be bad. Hope this helps. Avenging Dentist posted:Store credit. GW isn't bad for doing that, but it's certainly not the nicest thing they could have done either. This is an example of how to not be bad. Hope this helps too. Cthulhu Dreams posted:This is another woeful lost oppotunity. It would be a ton faster if 8 lasguns did X damage and you just rolled for the last two in the unit or w/e to minimise bucket of dice syndrome. Can you tell I played IG? Yeah I played them too. Towards the middle of 7th when they introduced d-weapons I played my last game of 40K. I had decided to try and use a tank company against some Eldar. I had first turn and managed to kill a guardian jet bike or two and put a wound on a wraith knight. I then handed it over to my opponent for his turn one and lost the game. The sense of scale, lack of movement and tactics, and the inability to affect the game state for about half the armies is really the worst thing. I hope they make it better in the new edition, but I don't really have a horse in the race anymore because I sold all my stuff after that game and AoS dropping. I'm mostly just curious to see how they actually update their rules.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
Macro-positioning: the placement of units in relationship to other units and features on the table. Micro position: the placement of models in relationship to other models and features on the table. Both of these offer a strategic element to the game, but micro quickly becomes cumbersome when you have more than a dozen figures per side. Templates are thematically fun and are much more visceral than rolling a dice to determine how many hits a weapon caused. The problem is that when you have a hundred figures per side, having to precisely position each figure is very time consuming. Abstracting it to a dice roll takes away a certain degree of strategic depth because now all you have to worry about is unit coherency and not defensive positioning, but it speeds up game time considerably. The other downside to removing templates is that you can't hit multiple units with them. You could get around this by having a rule that stated something to the effect of, "If a unit is within 2" of a unit hit by a Blast weapon, then that unit receives half the number of hits as the main target, rounding down." You'd have some degree of micro-positioning to worry about, but only the handful of models next to adjacent units and not every model within in relation to every other model within the squad. The big downside to that rule is that it would make Blast weapons way more effective in the opening turn when units are bunched together in the deployment zone. Of course, you can always add another rule, possibly scenario dependent, then states that Blast weapons cannot hit adjacent units in the deployment zone because of "initial fortifications" or something. But I'm loathe to solve mechanic problems by adding additional mechanic. I'd prefer a more graceful solution. Of course, 40k has never really done macro-positioning all that well either. It's a game with skirmish roots and basing that overemphasizes the individual for the scale it's played at. Macro only ever seems to matter for: assault charges, weapon ranges, retreating into an enemy (I forget what this is called), and securing objectives. There are a handful of other situations, like synapse, but these are more army specific and less general rules and most of these are more about "range bands" than they are about position. Height matters to a degree, but I think it only affects line of sight in a direct sense. Do units charging up or down hill receive penalties or bonuses? But basically there's no rules for cross-fire or firing lanes or flank charges. Where a unit is in relationship to another unit doesn't matter overly much. I just find it weird that a game that uses squads as its base unit size places so much emphasis on where an individual stands. And naturally Age of Sigmar, being the worst, uses the absolute worst way to determine hits from Blast weapons.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 05:22
|
|
|
i really wanna see someone bugging wotc about a refund for an 18 cent card. pretty much exactly the same as a 50 dollar book right? oh whats that? you bought the new campaign book thats mostly fluff? get hosed nerd, you dont get poo poo, i dont care if you bought it for the rules 
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 07:26
|
|
|
Kung Fu Fist gently caress posted:i really wanna see someone bugging wotc about a refund for an 18 cent card. pretty much exactly the same as a 50 dollar book right? oh whats that? you bought the new campaign book thats mostly fluff? get hosed nerd, you dont get poo poo, i dont care if you bought it for the rules As was said, Wizards is in a really tough spot when it comes to this and it's not really comparable at all to GW and codexes or rule books. Remember, Wizards is selling you a random pack and a banned card is going to just be one of several cards in the pack. Wizards didn't specifically sell you that card. It sucks that people bought them second-hand only for them to get banned a few days later, but Wizards taking responsibility and offering some kind of compensation would mean they are now tacitly responsible for the second hand market. What would the compensation even be? They could offer free packs or discounts on sets of cards, but they can't offer a 1:1 replacement for a different card without also opening up the floodgates for on demand cards. The other alternative is to just not ban the card and they gently caress up competitive play for however long until the next time they can ban cards without pissing people off. It seems pretty lose-lose for Wizards. Ideally they would have just banned it with all the rest, but they didn't and they were forced to choose from a bunch of bad choices. And just to be clear, I'm not saying Wizards made the right or wrong choice or that they shouldn't offer some kind of compensation to the players or that Wizards is better or worse than GW. I'm saying it's hard to compare the situations because Magic is very different from Warhams.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 07:52
|
|
|
It'll also effect the prices of the mythic rare planeswalker in the deck that was fueling the combo as well, along with possibly any rares in the deck.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 08:12
|
|
|
We ended up buying grip mats for star wars armada as the game was just too prone to ships getting accidentally shifted. Guild ball is another game that theoretically demands millimetre precision but every game I've seen and seen played is pretty fast and loose except when it comes to the more esoteric teams and their ridiculous shenanigans. Plus there's a lot you can get by with by just telling your opponent what the intent is, as mentioned earlier. Minis gaming doesn't really suit that level of precision. WMH for example features it at the competitive level but then pp produces minis with horrendous base overhang to make life even harder.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 08:52
|
|
|
Intent is basically how we play Kings of War because precise measurements suck and are basically impossible. "I'm moving to be over 10" from this unit so it's outside of charge range." Then if something gets bumped or shifted, everyone knows what was "supposed" be happening.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 08:59
|
|
|
PrinnySquadron posted:It'll also effect the prices of the mythic rare planeswalker in the deck that was fueling the combo as well, along with possibly any rares in the deck. Man who cares? gently caress people who view Magic cards as investments Also that planeswalker topped out at $15 anyway because the combo was so degenerate that no one was playing the format she was being used in Black_Nexus posted:gently caress I loved those games, so much time spent playing those. Yeah, they put out a garbage game that reset/wiped the setting and then stopped making them, which is a real shame.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 12:40
|
|
|
TheChirurgeon posted:Man who cares? gently caress people who view Magic cards as investments Oh yeah, I don't give a gently caress either to be honest, since I don't play Magic anymore, was just pointing out that technically it doesn't just affect the price of the common  The secondary market for CCGs is dumb.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 12:44
|
|
|
How gangly and/or fat are you guys that you're constantly elbowing and gut-pushing your minis "accidentally" around the table? I mean, I've knocked over a mini on occasion when reaching for another that's been placed in a precarious position or something, but you make it sound like you're playing in a room full of banana peels.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 13:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 17:19 |
|
|
TheChirurgeon posted:Man who cares? gently caress people who view Magic cards as investments Yeah the last game was stupid and changed the tone so dramatically it felt really off then they just went all in on Fire Emblem and face touching. I like Fire Emblem ok but if they could put out one less of those for a new classic Advance Wars it would be good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2017 13:29
|
|
