|
Post by Havock on Sept 25, 2018 19:22:26 GMT
In an abstract way, sort of. Tactics are after all the means to an end, the problem is that the rules of engagement in this game are kind of a zero-sum winner-takes-all thing that are extremely rare irl on the battlefield, despite having the same basic rule of "the first step to victory is not losing".
But without degrees of victory it becomes an all-or-nothing game where your "men" are just a resource to be spent. Removing morale and unit strength requirements for scenarios only excarberate the issue, despite them being a comfortable choice gameplay wise.
|
|
|
Post by droopingpuppy on Sept 25, 2018 19:55:02 GMT
And, you know, while chess is not so good at apply normal real world tactics, it is a good tool for sharpen the mind to learn and understand the tactics. It teaches you every move count, nothing is come without an effort, ways to decieve your opponent, and make sure that you may pay for the opportunity cost in order to do something.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Sept 25, 2018 20:10:44 GMT
And, you know, while chess is not so good at apply normal real world tactics, it is a good tool for sharpen the mind to learn and understand the tactics. It teaches you every move count, nothing is come without an effort, ways to decieve your opponent, and make sure that you may pay for the opportunity cost in order to do something. Indeed, it helps one to think about the entire battlefield and how to use sacrifice, traps, barriers, and planning ahead. Now, it doesn't fully translate to WMH, any more than WMH translates fully to life or to Chess. Much like kata, it trains your mental muscles to recognize those concepts and utilize them.
|
|
|
Post by Havock on Sept 25, 2018 21:29:27 GMT
Not to mention any game like this has one aspect that arguably is most unrealistic, and I'm not even talking about magic, no, it's the pinpoint precision and absolute certainty that "your dudes" will do exactly as you say as long as it is physically possible.
You're not commanding men, you're commanding terminators.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Sept 25, 2018 22:21:24 GMT
Not to mention any game like this has one aspect that arguably is most unrealistic, and I'm not even talking about magic, no, it's the pinpoint precision and absolute certainty that "your dudes" will do exactly as you say as long as it is physically possible. You're not commanding men, you're commanding terminators. That and lack of proper reactions. Reality is not turn-based. Two people on opposite sides can literally shoot each other at the same time.
|
|
|
Post by Gamingdevil on Sept 26, 2018 12:03:51 GMT
Not to mention any game like this has one aspect that arguably is most unrealistic, and I'm not even talking about magic, no, it's the pinpoint precision and absolute certainty that "your dudes" will do exactly as you say as long as it is physically possible. You're not commanding men, you're commanding terminators. Well, arguably, that's what dice are for. It might be said that they just fail to hit because the opponent dodged, but they also could just be new conscripts that are really bad at what they do.
|
|
|
Post by davycannonhound on Sept 26, 2018 16:38:52 GMT
Not to mention any game like this has one aspect that arguably is most unrealistic, and I'm not even talking about magic, no, it's the pinpoint precision and absolute certainty that "your dudes" will do exactly as you say as long as it is physically possible. You're not commanding men, you're commanding terminators. With factions like Convergence of Cyriss, Legion of Everblight, etc., thats not completely in-accurate. That said, a return of fear rules (along with maybe courage rules?) could make the game much less terminatory.
|
|
|
Post by cygnarstronk on Sept 26, 2018 17:06:31 GMT
Basically, no.
The whole game is so messed up as far as realism goes that is useless to set up a real battle tactic, only some forms of deployment still remain valid. Just look at armor being useless for single wound troopers and you get the idea.
I play cygnar, our highly armored units are the stormblades. They are freaking DEF12 and ARM15, any kind of low pow ranged attack is going to kill them. It's absurd because heavyly armored troops where meant to be really resistant both against projectiles and melee attacks.
At the same time warjacks and to a lesser extent warbeasts are much less resilient than they should be. a ARM19 heavy can be cut to shreds with about3 pow12 weapon master charges. 3 dudes with some swords or axes ripped apart a walking tank, that is... wrong. Colossals and some BE are even worse than that.
Same thing happens with artillery and shooting in general. Artillery, on the field, should be avery long ranged fire support. It delivers devastating attacks, but with a rather low rate of fire and probably inaccurate to some degrees. In game, artillery shoots at mid range and is usually much worse than a boostable gun on a light warjack or a CRA. It makes using artillery completely different from reality.
|
|
Juris
Junior Strategist
Posts: 578
|
Post by Juris on Sept 26, 2018 21:13:42 GMT
Not to mention any game like this has one aspect that arguably is most unrealistic, and I'm not even talking about magic, no, it's the pinpoint precision and absolute certainty that "your dudes" will do exactly as you say as long as it is physically possible. You're not commanding men, you're commanding terminators. With factions like Convergence of Cyriss, Legion of Everblight, etc., thats not completely in-accurate. That said, a return of fear rules (along with maybe courage rules?) could make the game much less terminatory. For the love of Morrow, don't even mention a return to the dark days of terror checks...
|
|
|
Post by Havock on Sept 27, 2018 5:56:03 GMT
For the love of Morrow, don't even mention a return to the dark days of terror checks... Yeah, no matter how "unrealistic", it really is good riddance to bad rules, having a unit Firetruck off into doing nothing because they got spooked (again) sucked. Not having those save-or-suck/die things in the game is betetr for everyone.
|
|
|
Post by droopingpuppy on Sept 27, 2018 12:32:16 GMT
And it can be justified by the presense of warcaster/warlocks, the gods of war incarnated in mortal form in Immoren.
Perhaps, Warhammer 40k 8th edition's one seems the better future of the moral check. Instead of simply make the whole unit inert, remove some of them would be better.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Sept 27, 2018 14:37:56 GMT
And it can be justified by the presense of warcaster/warlocks, the gods of war incarnated in mortal form in Immoren. Perhaps, Warhammer 40k 8th edition's one seems the better future of the moral check. Instead of simply make the whole unit inert, remove some of them would be better. I haven't kept up with 40K as much as I used to, but removing models from a unit didn't go well in 5th Edition, but that was probably because only the Fearless models did that. In 6th and 7th, unless the unit was right next to the table edge, there was always a fair chance of recovering the unit from its failing morale.
Units in WMH are generally not very big. 10 is the normal maximum size, though there are units that can build go beyond that (such as Alexia1's unit, Press Gangers, etc). If you lost 3, then lost 3 more, over half your unit is gone. For a 5 man unit it can get worse. The few non-character 2-3 man units could be wiped out just for killing one of them. The average maximum unit size in 40K is somewhere between 10-15, smaller unit caps usually going to those with better Leadership. This means the removal of models isn't as painful as it is for WMH.
|
|