|
Post by lovehugs on Dec 23, 2017 0:42:08 GMT
Go for it.
If PP could send us a few Man of Wars for me to play with, lets say 2 full squads of each, that'd be great.
I don't have the models to play em, I could proxy some space wolf termies maybe, but Im just wondering what it is that the theme feels like it's missing.
Like, is it just as boring as running 20 big 40mm models up and charging and seeing who wins?
|
|
|
Post by smoothcriminal on Dec 23, 2017 1:57:45 GMT
It's less boring than running 8 jacks forward and watch opponent playing against their countercharge ranges, that's for sure.
|
|
kaos
Junior Strategist
Posts: 268
|
Post by kaos on Dec 23, 2017 7:58:07 GMT
Steampowered[value][action]: roll 2d6, of the result is lower than the steampowered value, unit/model gains [action]. If the result is higher, each model in the unit takes d3 damage.
Examples: steampowered countercharge, steampowered weapon master, steampowered quick attack, etc.
Maybe it's a bit too dicey but could be a good base to make them interesting.
|
|
|
Post by lovehugs on Dec 23, 2017 12:34:09 GMT
It's less boring than running 8 jacks forward and watch opponent playing against their countercharge ranges, that's for sure. Is that 8 of 3 types of Jacks? I kinda of like the Kodiaks when they steam and throw stuff and when the marauders pinball things or having behemoth reduce anything it touches to scrap. I like grolar charging through the forest knocking what he hits down and just spraying their faces with bullets after. I've lost way too many games by taking a conquest and having its only goal to be surrounded and just P+S 23 sweep everything. Cause it's damn fun doing those things. Man of War at the moment just seems like Run, advance, shield wall, charge. I like the Big Armor, Big Guns, Big Hammers theme, with the "Strap more Armor and Gun to it". I just think if that's what the theme is, we need the biggest gun and the biggest armor.
|
|
|
Post by tapecrawler on Dec 23, 2017 18:20:04 GMT
The two closest equivalents I could find were Eradicators and Skinwalkers. Both cost 9/15 and have 8 boxes.
The Eradicators are +1 SPD, +2 DEF, +1 attack, -1.5” RNG, -1 ARM, and have the option of either being MAT9 or ARM17. They also have sidestep.
The Skinwalkers have +1 SPD, +2 DEF, -1 MAT, hyper regeneration, relentless charge, and unyielding. And last I checked (a while ago, admittedly) the Circle players considered them trash.
The Demo Corps pale in comparison. I really like the idea of MOW’s in general being able to take steam damage for benefits. My preference would be additional distance on any kind of move. That would solve the biggest problem of them waddling across the table and getting shot for half of the game before they become relevant. Another option that I quite like is giving them slam for steam damage. Going in a totally different direction with their special rules, what about magical and RFP? Those are two areas we are sorely lacking especially in this theme.
|
|
|
Post by Cryptix on Dec 23, 2017 18:22:07 GMT
Sorry to burst your guys bubble but in the RPG they suffered penalties from being damaged not bonuses.
|
|
|
Post by tapecrawler on Dec 23, 2017 18:43:02 GMT
That makes more sense especially in a rpg, but we are trying to make them into a viable unit that isn’t a worse copy of Stormtroopers. Right now they are a disaster and only the foolhardy or someone trying to prove an obscure point would play them. Steam type bonuses tie into the fluff about them and make them different than every other medium based multiwound unit.
|
|
|
Post by ozvelpoon on Dec 24, 2017 7:07:37 GMT
If I had the power to dictate Armoured Corps identity in the faction I would like to see it be our "Brick" army. An infantry based "MMM" backed up by bombardiers and tankers sounds like something that we are currently lacking. Heavy Armour Gunline.
I think a major issue that will come to light in the CID is that will so many medium based models all of whom like to cluster up positioning will become an issue. Shocktroopers under shield wall; Bombardiers cluster up for CRA; Mechanics tripping over themselves trying to get in B2B to repair. Irusk2 will do great things to remedy that, but what could we hope for in the way of a theme benefit that would not step on his toes? I would live to see something like Advanced move on Shocktroopers and Tankers; and reposition on man-o-war units.
|
|
Provengreil
Junior Strategist
Choir Kills: 12
Posts: 850
|
Post by Provengreil on Dec 28, 2017 13:29:01 GMT
It's less boring than running 8 jacks forward and watch opponent playing against their countercharge ranges, that's for sure. I like the Big Armor, Big Guns, Big Hammers theme, with the "Strap more Armor and Gun to it". I just think if that's what the theme is, we need the biggest gun and the biggest armor. Might I politely recommend battletech?
|
|
|
Post by Blargaliscious on Dec 28, 2017 20:50:16 GMT
I like the Big Armor, Big Guns, Big Hammers theme, with the "Strap more Armor and Gun to it". I just think if that's what the theme is, we need the biggest gun and the biggest armor. Might I politely recommend battletech? I love Battletech! And I would still be playing it if the rules for it weren't so... old! If Battletech were to get its rules re-done as a streamlined miniature game along the lines of Warmachine (ditch the hex maps!) and get the miniatures re-done to be more scaled to their weight (100 ton assault mechs need to be on 50mm round bases, light mechs on 30mm round bases) I would start wandering around randomly screaming "Shut up and take my money!" But until then, let's prep for the Armored Korps CID.
|
|
|
Post by pac on Jan 8, 2018 18:22:37 GMT
I feel like it would have been thematic to give the base models and CA Armour Piercing. Obviously take their P+S down to 9-12, but this allows them to Demolish anything they hit. They would have the issue of not being able to take out mass infantry but I don't know if they should have the ability to do both. If you were wanting to you could do them as *attacks and make them P+S 12 so you have the choice of AP or Cleave/Thresher/Backswing.
|
|