|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Sept 12, 2011 12:11:40 GMT -5
The mission Chris is referring to is modified kp so a 425pt unit is worth 5kp. Every army will have 19kp + reinforcements.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ranger Dude on Sept 12, 2011 13:47:07 GMT -5
A group of us had a discussion regarding the Dwindling Supplies mission. We all seemed to like it, but we all felt that the "Out of ammo" mechanic occured too late. Not that it couldn't be decisive, but in many cases, it wasn't. The consensus we seemed to reach was that starting it first turn would bog down the game, but starting it turn five made it almost meaningless. So, the idea was to start it on turn three. My additional thought on this is that since the GT has had a rule in place the past few years, that not completing turn 3 would result in a zero score, staring this mechanic on turn three would guaruntee that all players had to deal with it unless they were tabled by turn 2. (That was more or less me.)
|
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Sept 12, 2011 14:51:13 GMT -5
Maybe dwindling supplies would be better with 1 objective centered in each quarter and one at the table's center. If everyone thinks running out of ammo on t3 is a good idea I'm fine with it. It will just turn some games into pillow fights as the effects are permanent until cancelled with an objective.
Jay - lmk if you need me to make any changes otherwise I'll assume you guys are handling the final mission changes.
|
|
|
|
Post by warmasterprimus on Sept 12, 2011 15:47:05 GMT -5
I agree that the points spreads need to be more diverse either by more than just W/L/D or by increasing the requirement for a win. I think the personal experiences are too subjective this early on for certain points. How is placing 3 objectives over 2 any different than seize ground with 5? The mission says place them exactly as seize ground and you still roll for sides after. I also had a totally different experience with dwindling supplies when my GKT unit with libby lost their power weapons the turn they needed to assault hammernators off an objective. Since I wasn't currently holding an objective, that mechanic sealed my fate. There were too many massacres so I agree the scoring needs to be looked at and I did like Bens idea about changing outflanking reinforcements for the 3rd mission we played. Well, that's embarrassing. I don't know how to play one of the basic 3 missions of the game. If I played it correctly, then I'd probably have a different experience. d**n, I don't know how I've missed that for so long. |
|
|
|
Post by warmasterprimus on Sept 12, 2011 15:50:55 GMT -5
Like Aaron said, even my low KP armies are pretty high KPs for this scenario. Normally, I only have 10KPs, but in that senario I easily had over 20 (thanks to Rob handing it to me,... multiple times).
|
|
