|
Post by Stormsmith Dropout on Jun 20, 2017 1:32:07 GMT
Let's take this discussion to this thread.
We're about 1 year into mkiii. Has premeasuring been a net good? Or did its entry into WMH detract from the game? I think both sides have merits, but I would ultimately choose premeasuring to be a good thing.
Please explain your reasoning as clearly as possible, and keep things cordial. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by GreatBigTree on Jun 20, 2017 3:11:17 GMT
I've only known MkIII, started about 3.5 months ago. I've always preferred pre-measuring in games. It just makes sense, and there are so many work-arounds anyway that it saves time in the long run. It also reduces the "experience advantage" players that know a board have over people that don't. It removes the need to "Cheat" by deducing distances from other sources of information. Using shooty units as range-finders for melee units, for example. Just saves everyone time, and prevents soreness and accusations of cheating.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Jun 20, 2017 3:45:13 GMT
I've only known MkIII, started about 3.5 months ago. I've always preferred pre-measuring in games. It just makes sense, and there are so many work-arounds anyway that it saves time in the long run. It also reduces the "experience advantage" players that know a board have over people that don't. It removes the need to "Cheat" by deducing distances from other sources of information. Using shooty units as range-finders for melee units, for example. Just saves everyone time, and prevents soreness and accusations of cheating. got 99% of the issues in 1. Its better for new players, it stops using annoying tricks to find information and other weaponised trigonometry. It is a better way to play.
|
|
|
Post by W0lfBane on Jun 20, 2017 4:46:31 GMT
Premeasuring is good. But i think it might have led to some silliness including planning out perfect turns and taking back mistakes "cause we already measured it."
Like i think we need some sportsmanship rule similar to chess. Like once the your hand leaves your model that model has reached that position and has used up n amount of movement to get there. You can't take it back. It can move back but it would need to use more movement to do so. Also like once your dice leave your hand you're committed to that die roll unless the roll is illegal (rolling too many dice)
I'm quilty of the first one. I moved thyra up was about to roll dice then realized i had a better charge to said model and rolled it back to do the better charge. My opponent want bugged by it cause i had yet to roll and same model was getting attacked anyways. But still.
|
|
|
Post by Rowdy Dragon on Jun 20, 2017 4:50:09 GMT
Well, pre-measuring contributes to the rise of Jacks so that's a plus in my book.
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Jun 20, 2017 4:52:21 GMT
Premeasuring is good. But i think it might have led to some silliness including planning out perfect turns and taking back mistakes "cause we already measured it." Like i think we need some sportsmanship rule similar to chess. Like once the your hand leaves your model that model has reached that position and has used up n amount of movement to get there. You can't take it back. It can move back but it would need to use more movement to do so. Also like once your dice leave your hand you're committed to that die roll unless the roll is illegal (rolling too many dice) I'm quilty of the first one. I moved thyra up was about to roll dice then realized i had a better charge to said model and rolled it back to do the better charge. My opponent want bugged by it cause i had yet to roll and same model was getting attacked anyways. But still. I honestly don't mind as long as the position of the original model is there and measurable and dice haven't rolled. Like I said in the last thread, all that the premeasuring rules needed at all were 2 stipulations: 1. That any base representing the CURRENT place that a model stood be labelled as such 2. At the end of either player turn, all proxy bases be removed. But even then, I don't think its necessary.
|
|
|
Post by GumbaFish on Jun 20, 2017 11:45:24 GMT
I have really enjoyed the transition over to pre-measuring. As a new player starting MKII I entered into a very veteran gaming group and it was very difficult to learn the game and how to guess distances simultaneously. I would often lose pieces because I thought I couldn't have charged (when I could have) or was safe (when I wasn't) and it made for a pretty rough go even though I really enjoyed the game. Now I feel like the outcome of the game depends much more on my tactics and I am able to take more decisive action because I have more information to make those decisions. I also always felt like all of the ways one could previously bypass taking measurements like checking control ranges etc... felt kind of like I was taking advantage of the rules and I didn't really like how 'gamey' that felt to me. Lastly, I think it leads to fewer disagreements between players if the appropriate measurements are made prior to taking action and an agreement is reached. To sum up I have found that gameplay in MKIII is cleaner, players can make informed decisions based on full information rather than test their ability to judge distances, and that this has lead to fewer disagreements during games.
|
|
|
Post by DanX on Jun 20, 2017 15:08:37 GMT
Premeasuring is good. But i think it might have led to some silliness including planning out perfect turns and taking back mistakes "cause we already measured it." Like i think we need some sportsmanship rule similar to chess. Like once the your hand leaves your model that model has reached that position and has used up n amount of movement to get there. You can't take it back. It can move back but it would need to use more movement to do so. Also like once your dice leave your hand you're committed to that die roll unless the roll is illegal (rolling too many dice) I'm quilty of the first one. I moved thyra up was about to roll dice then realized i had a better charge to said model and rolled it back to do the better charge. My opponent want bugged by it cause i had yet to roll and same model was getting attacked anyways. But still. I personally sometimes have a personal rule of no take backs. If you play and take backs are acceptable, then you get sloppy. Though I'd rather enforce that personally. In a friendly game, which I hope mine are, if you want take back I'm normally really happy for you to have one. I've noticed that take backs slow me down too, and with some of my lists I'm already fighting against the clock as much as my opponent.
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Jun 20, 2017 15:38:21 GMT
Never thought premeasuring was going to be a problem and it once again (actually even better than in WFB/WH40K where it also became a "reason" to introduce random charges...bleargh!) proved to be an excellent choice, cleaning up the game considerably and making it more tactical.
|
|
|
Post by oncouch1 on Jun 20, 2017 16:17:50 GMT
Premeasuring is a net positive. It made the game much cleaner, and more tactical.
|
|
|
Post by chillychinaman on Jun 20, 2017 16:53:39 GMT
I've been on the side of pre-measuring since 40k 4e, I know that's not actually that long. However, wouldn't it be easier to just reduce the clock slightly? Super-accurate turns and model interactions is mostly the realm of tournament play where clocks are standard correct? People could do whatever they wanted with the caveat that it'll cost them. It incentivizes being able to to eye-ball distances for the sake of speed and efficiency while also allowing for the precise measurements, often non-linear distances that the eye would have greater difficulty discerning.
BTW, what is the standard clock amount? I've never played under any sort of timer and am curious if my current "play speed" would lose me "tournament style" games.
Also for the sake of "pretty up the board," is it really that difficult to take pictures after the markers have been cleaned up? They are removed at the end of the turn right?
As a final aside, it's also been my experience that 40k is much better to look at due to the prevalence, at least in my next of the woods, of actual 3d terrain instead of the flat markers.
|
|
|
Post by greytemplar on Jun 20, 2017 17:54:02 GMT
Premeasuring has a number of bad side effects for game balance.
1) It heavily favors factions with longer threat ranges. You can easily park yourself the smallest squidge out of your opponent's charge threat, while being well within your own. Combine this with the SR17 packet which doesn't encourage people to commit to the scenario, and you've got way too much of a skew towards factions which are innately fast and towards gunlines in general. Since not all factions are equally fast, nor can all of them do gunlines as easily, you have a major balance issue.
Before, the player of a slower faction could attempt to play a game of chicken. He could park himself where he would attempt to bait his opponent's models out. Gambling that he is outside charge range. While his opponent would have to decide if he was in out out using limited data. This was an extremely fun mental game for me, and I know it was for a lot of other people. It also balanced out the fact some factions are just flat out faster. Sure, you did have a longer threat, but you had to be sure you were in, otherwise you might overextend and fail a charge.
2) It favors gunlines too much. Just like factions which are faster than others, gunlines can park themselves just outside of their opponent's charge threat and shoot from relative safety, being safe from immediate reprisal. While their slow opponent has no choice but to slog it across the field and get shot to pieces.
And as I mentioned above, with SR17, the scenario doesn't force gunlines to actually enter their opponents threat ranges immediately. He can hang back quite safely for 3-4 turns without being in danger of losing. Then once he has shot his opponent off the board, he can swoop in and take the scenario with no trouble.
3) Skill reduction. Many of us have spent decades honing our ability to judge distances. It's a skill anybody who has the spatial perception to play a game that's reliant on 3 dimensional space can develop, so it's not an unfair skill requirement. Now all those years of skill development are wasted. Eliminating a good chunk of the skill from the game, pissing off the veterans who are necessary to keep the game healthy. You can't afford to piss off the experienced players or you'll not have a meta for new players to join and people to teach them. A poor PR move on PP's part, and the game is less skill based and less tactically deep than it was previously. No more playing the mind game with your opponent over if he is in charge range or not. It's now just open information, which removes a good chunk of the game's appeal.
4) Premeasuring leads to some games being drawn out and painful affairs where one opponent is measuring everything. He does out a whole proxy turn before taking his actual turn. Deathclock existing only partially alleviates this problem. Sure, you might win because your opponent spent all his time measuring and clocked himself. Deathclock wins are only satisfying when you spent most of that time actually playing instead of watching your opponent fiddle around with measurements. The SR17 measurement rules provide somewhat of a disincentive to do this since you have to spend more time picking up the previous measurement's markers, but it doesn't prevent it completely.
5) It doesn't make the game cleaner like many above claim. You could play just as clean of a game in Mk2. A game being clean means that all measurements are done properly and with precision. Nothing about not being able to freely premeasure prevented you from measuring correctly when the time came to measure. It just meant you had to make a decision and then were locked into that decision before you knew the outcome.
|
|
|
Post by ForEver_Blight on Jun 20, 2017 19:15:27 GMT
1) for factions that have longer threat ranges they lack other survivability stats. My Neraph out threats a Juggernaut because it sacrifices a ton of armor and hitboxes. If it were never a sure thing if it's target was in or out of threat, The Juggernaut would always have the advantage. Because if the Juggernaut gets it wrong it has a much, much, higher chance of surviving.
It's a way to balance fast, light armor, versus slow, heavy armor. (Ignoring the ton and a half speed buffs in khador)
2) You cannot give up more than a turn playing a gun line. With the way scoring is set in SR17 you can score 3 or 4 points in a single turn and the the "auto" win is now down to 5 points. It easily makes the scenario just as applicable as before.
3) Sometimes no matter how much you practice a skill and how much importance you place on it. It's not what the people who own the IP want. You and your vet friends are welcome to play the old rules all day long.
4) This is an issue and is being toiled over right now. So in a tournament setting it's being controlled. As for casual games, communicate with your opponenent and try to work something out for the betterment of both parties involved. Worst case scenario you enforce the SR rules.
|
|
|
Post by Azuresun on Jun 20, 2017 19:21:22 GMT
Overall, it's an improvement. But guns weren't rebalanced for never missing a chance to aim, and being able to kite 0.5" out of threat.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 20, 2017 19:32:15 GMT
I like pre-measuring in general. However, it's definitely boosted some factions to the detriment of others. I don't think it's actually been as negative in terms of measuring threat ranges, because a lot of the time maximum threat ranges require the application of buffs, which may or may not be applied in a given turn. So if the opponent wants to sit out of your max threat range, they're usually giving up board space to do that, while you can maneuver to retain your threat advantage for future turns. In game, of course it's more complicated than that, but in game, continually ghosting the opponent's melee threat ranges doesn't usually work out. You have to either decoy your opponent into making a suboptimal commitment, or force the engagement by putting yourself into the scenario. That being said, I agree with Azuresun and others that gunlines weren't appropriately rebalanced for the advantages pre-measuring gives. The key thing about melee threat is that even if you can get the alpha reliably, barring specific feats you are generally leaving yourself in range for a counterpunch, when the same is NOT true of the average gunline. While the new pre-measuring rules might allow a melee army to more reliably get the alpha, for shooting armies is often translates into an entire additional round of shooting - and I don't think that shooting elements were properly rebalanced with this in mind.
|
|