i posted some conversion rules over on BGG. let me knowif i missed anything please.

javascript:void(0);/*1301881329919*/

Thanks for the post. It looks like a good start. I'm curious why you went with leader to closest model and not leader to leader when measuring between units?

rwwingate said:

that might change with testing. biggest reason was for range 1 weapons, knife/grenades, and flamethrowers. with those being 4” weapons, i didnt want the defender 'hiding' his squad leader behind the squad.

Tonights test run was pretty good. We played 2 games at 24 points each. My allies won both games!

The changeover to gridless felt really natural and most of the changes felt so natural, we thought very little about it. The only thing we had to play arpund with was the starting distance between us. we started the first game allowing a 10” deployment zone that you just placed into as you activated. that left us a little too far from each other, and our infantry units never got to make any type of impact. so the second game we made the top of the 10? zone the entry zone to move on, which made the distance more towards the tiled scenarios distance. things seemed much better that time. We played on a 4 x 4 table.

i'll post some pics on it as soon as my opponent sends them to me. but all in all seemed successful tonight.

The question is though, did the mods make it a better, more tactical or even funner (It should be a word ) ?

When I first saw this game the first thought I had was 'I'm going to convert this to play it on an open battlefield, sans grid'. But after a few games I have come to appreciate the grid. Once the grid is removed it's a short slide into playing SOTR or 40k. And I do not want to play SOTR or 40k. The grid, the simplicity of the rules, those things are as important to me as the minis. After all I could just proxy my DT troops as Imperial Guard if I wanted to play a more complicated less fun game. After nearly 20 years playing 40k I am thrilled to be getting rid of my last army this month and dedicating my hobby to DT. I think the game will suffer if it goes gridless.

We've been playing with 250-500 points on 6x4s and infantry have done just fine. We've got woods, ruins, terrain a plenty.

Hope none of that came across as too rantish, I just fear the Emperor's finest despoiling our lovely game with their 'style' of play.

blkdymnd said:

did it feel so natural because it made little difference , or because you have played so many other games like 40K that removing the grid allowed it to blend in with 40K and all those games like it ?

cause it sounds like some of the ideas from other games being aplied to this one like deploying so far in . while i understand that you played on a 4X4 , expanding the deployment zones seems more like introducing 40k to this game by scaling up distances , rather than expanding the battle field size of this game to scale this game up on its own .

GrandInquisitorKris said:

not like 40k at all. and we didnt really deploy in the first time, we placed in. kind of a hybrid deployment i guess. second game was more dust traditional. it was so natural because it felt like dust without a grid. and i really borrowed very little from anything else, maybe a slight AT43 flavor, but thats because dust rules share a lot of the same flavor as AT43 anyway.