|
Post by theadept on Apr 22, 2017 15:21:21 GMT
If PP sticks to their guns over the '1 table marker only' thing, how soon do you think it'll be before the community standard becomes Freemeasure Steamroller - using all of the SR packet except the table marker limitation?
|
|
|
Post by trollsareblue on Apr 22, 2017 16:52:46 GMT
People used to not use a shitton of markers, and the game seemed to work just fine. I think they'll adjust.
|
|
|
Post by greytemplar on Apr 22, 2017 21:01:50 GMT
I hope PP sticks to their guns. People laying out bajillions of measuring instruments was annoying, and pretty damn stupid. Everyone should just be glad you can measure one thing at a time and be happy you get any measurements at all.
|
|
|
Post by elladan52 on Apr 22, 2017 21:08:30 GMT
Could go either way, but so far in test games it hasn't been an issue. I hope they streamline the rule and make it tighter and clearer but it isn't as tremendous a burden as people make out.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Apr 22, 2017 21:43:20 GMT
I hope PP sticks to their guns. People laying out bajillions of measuring instruments was annoying, and pretty damn stupid. Everyone should just be glad you can measure one thing at a time and be happy you get any measurements at all. Proof? What proof do you have that they are laying out "bajillions"? This, to me, sounds Exactly like moral panics that happen every week. "oh my God, the teenagers are injecting drugs into their eyeballs and doing sex heroin, the government needs to do something!"
|
|
|
Post by gobber on Apr 22, 2017 23:09:11 GMT
"Freemeasuring" seriously helps with adjudicating Helga feats. Cyclone+slams are not friendly to a single measurement marker, especially if she'll need to bulldoze.
|
|
|
Post by lofton on Apr 23, 2017 0:22:59 GMT
My thoughts are it makes the game more concise made they're using their clock go for it as long as it's clearly marked.
|
|
|
Post by greytemplar on Apr 23, 2017 0:44:09 GMT
"Freemeasuring" seriously helps with adjudicating Helga feats. Cyclone+slams are not friendly to a single measurement marker, especially if she'll need to bulldoze. I do agree they need to clean the wording. What I think it should say is you are allowed to measure a single item or action at a time. So you can measure out X's charge lane to see where he can move to take the fewest free strikes. But you cannot measure out the potential places your warlock can stand and still have X, Y, and Z warbeasts still be in his control area after X has made this charge, Y runs to this location, and Z walks over here and sprays these 4 models.
|
|
|
Post by danith00 on Apr 23, 2017 1:31:14 GMT
You can measure a single model with as many measurements as needed. What is the freaking problem?
|
|
princeraven
Junior Strategist
Shredder spam is best spam
Posts: 256
|
Post by princeraven on Apr 23, 2017 5:54:51 GMT
You can measure a single model with as many measurements as needed. What is the freaking problem? As per the current CID rules I cannot: - Mark out threat ranges with more than one bead. - Place down melee range markers to check for free strikes while using a proxy base for the moving model. - Place two proxy bases for a model with any ability to make more than one movement such as Reposition or Overrun. And those are just the ones I can think of before even playing with the new rules.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Apr 23, 2017 6:04:26 GMT
You can measure a single model with as many measurements as needed. What is the freaking problem? As per the current CID rules I cannot: - Mark out threat ranges with more than one bead. - Place down melee range markers to check for free strikes while using a proxy base for the moving model. - Place two proxy bases for a model with any ability to make more than one movement such as Reposition or Overrun. And those are just the ones I can think of before even playing with the new rules. Marking out a deployment zone with long markers is technically an infinite amount of static measurements from the back of the board to 7" or 10" up. You are forced to deploy by measuring with each model with a tape measure from the back of the board, which is inaccurate.
|
|
|
Post by trollsareblue on Apr 23, 2017 8:06:37 GMT
Insert eyeroll here.
A lot of what you are seeing as a problem is easily overcome with clear communication between you and your opponent. You don't need a zillion markers for that. I personally don't give a crap about how many markers people use for something. Eat that clock! I can see PP's point, however, and I think the wailing and gnashing of teeth is a bit excessive.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Apr 23, 2017 8:11:00 GMT
Insert eyeroll here. A lot of what you are seeing as a problem is easily overcome with clear communication between you and your opponent. You don't need a zillion markers for that. I personally don't give a crap about how many markers people use for something. Eat that clock! I can see PP's point, however, and I think the wailing and gnashing of teeth is a bit excessive. Be a petulant eye roller all you want, but CID is for testing and when the rule doesn't allow you to do something simple like measure deployment without ridiculous levels of qualification to make things work, then it is a non functional rule. PPs point is based on nothing of note, premeasuring was the best part of mark 3 and they are trying to pull it back so occasionally people will lose games because they lack information. How fun.
|
|
|
Post by trollsareblue on Apr 23, 2017 8:26:08 GMT
Or, you know, you could not be intentionally obtuse. PP isn't rolling anything back. They are suggesting you can play a game without using a token for every model. Communicate with your opponent. It will be fine.
|
|
princeraven
Junior Strategist
Shredder spam is best spam
Posts: 256
|
Post by princeraven on Apr 23, 2017 8:56:08 GMT
A lot of what you are seeing as a problem is easily overcome with clear communication between you and your opponent. You don't need a zillion markers for that. I personally don't give a crap about how many markers people use for something. Eat that clock! I can see PP's point, however, and I think the wailing and gnashing of teeth is a bit excessive. First of all, use of templates, proxy bases, etc. is communicating with your opponent, but I'm going to assume you mean verbal communication. Please explain to me how clearly visualing a 90 degree arc of maximum threat range from my opponent's Stormwall on the table is possible solely through verbal communcation. Or measuring where I need Typhon to go to get a good spray coverage and the position within 6" of that location to Overrun him back to in order to minimise retaliation.
|
|