So, I'm fresh after several battles again with my friend. We played Scenario 7 of The Blue Thunder (Destruction) with small modification: we played with 200 points limit and with whatever we have (so that means we could use both core sets units, command groups, artilleries, snipers/observers and my friend used Grim Reapers+OZZ).

Unfortunately for Allies I won all of the battles which made us considering some changes about this game.

So this is what we have decided to implement in future games:

1. Hero attached to unit cannot be assigned more than 1 wound from single source unless all other models in the attached unit are already assigned a wound i.e. Lara and Heavy Laser Grenadiers are shot by the Mickey with 75mm Howitzer. Allies player roll 8 dices and obtains 3 hits. Lara and Grenadiers roll any save rolls and eventually get 3 hits. So normally Lara would be assigned all 3 hits (what a bravery! ) saving Grenadiers but with our rule she can only be assigned 1 wound and the rest must be assigned to the rest of the guys leaving only 1 Grenadier left alive.

We have played with this rule today and it have worked well, so I can truly recommend it.

2. All Axis unit with DAMAGE RESILIENT skill are problematic as we think they are slightly too tough. It was virtually impossible to stop them (combining Lara's ASSAULT skill and DAMAGE RESILIENT pretty often allowed me to chase down whatever I wanted and put a hell on the poor yankee boys).

Sure you might try to focus all firepower to stop DAMAGE RESILIENT, Armour 3 unit but where is the sense of playing like that?

So we decided to modify DAMAGE RESILIENT skill in this way: it still work as normal, but hits from main walker guns (like Mickey's Howitzer, Pounder's 17 Pdr Gun, Steel Rain's Petard Mortar etc), artillery and flamethrowers DISALLOW to use DAMAGE RESILIENT skill.

I don't think that even a toughest guy would withstand shot from 17Pdr Gun or getting burnt from flamethrower.

And I didn't even use Zombies... Zombies+Grenadier-X... Fast, Assault, Damage Resilient with s**t load of attacks??? My buddy would kill me...

3. Blackhawk's Dual Piat had increased range to 3 which makes him nice, cheap but not overpowered counter light-walker.

What do you think about those changes and do you have any your own ideas?

cheers

daniello_s

Apart from the increased Blackhawk range, I don't really agree with your rulings. And even then, I wouldn't change it myself. I think units and rules should only be changed if they are perceived to be totally broken, otherwise you're potentially messing up with the balance of a game. Just because something seems a little tough in a couple of scenarios, it doesn't mean it needs to be changed. I'd really advise you to first try your best to come up with tactics to counter this apparent unbalance. All the changes you mention downgrades the axis in favour of the allies, but as an allied player myself, I tend to win most games against my axis opponent, so take it from me that the allies CAN handle fully damage resilient heavy troops. And heroes attached to squads are supposed to increase their survivability, but that won't really happen with your rules. Heroes are pretty expensive, and if they can't keep a squad intact after an initial attack, they're not very useful. You'd be better off just fielding another squad instead of a hero.

Of course, this is just my opinion, you're certainly free to play the game as you'd like to. I'd just advise you to trust the rules as they are and only change them as a last resort.

Well from my point of view as an Axis Player vs an allied player I have Won most of the games that I have played; also from my point of view when playing as allies I have also won most of the games that I have played. So my conclusion is that both armies have their own strengths and weaknesses. I feel that these moddification to the rules really just serve to handicap one player over the other, now your free to play however you wish I think the real solution is to increase the skill level of your opponent. After your match talk about what each of you could have done better and try to discuss how you can improve your game for next time.

Agree don't changes the rules they have been test !!

Thanks for comments lads.

I cannot agree with Loophole Master about Heroes - since when they should increase units survivability??? They are to increase units abilities by their (Heroes) skills/weapons like Lara thanks to her ASSAULT skill/double MG allows Heavy Laser Grenadiers to get quick into firing position plus secures them from enemy infantry or Stefan plus Sturmpioniere Squad - Stefan's ASSAULT+flamer works well with Sturmpioniere's FAST+flamer.

As for DAMAGE RESILIENT maybe idea with flamers is not the best (we will be testing it) but don't you think it looks silly that a man can survive direct shot from big calibre gun???

Anyway what tips would you give my buddy about tackling DAMAGE RESILIENT units?

cheers

daniello_s

daniello_s said:

Since this game was created. That is a main role of the heroes in this game. Sure, giving a skill to a squad is also important, but several heroes offer no such synergy (Chef, Priest, Joe, Rosie, Angela, Totenmeister...), so if they can't soak the brunt of the damage a squad takes, there's little point in attaching them to them.

As for how to deal with DR units, well, lots of firepower, that's how. They are dangerous adversaries, and should be considered a priority target. Either engage in force, or avoid if at all possible.

Loophole Master said:

Chef - gives you 2x flamer so beautifully compose with any FAST unit. Can be nasty to any infantry and any walker.

Priest - AGILE anyone? Extra movement possibility for unit plus Priest's re-rollable dynamite - again you can combine this hero and the unit which makes them deadly to the infantry and walkers.

Joe - BLACK OPS + UGL weapon... What else would you like for him???

Rosie - haven't seen her in action to be honest so I won't say anything.

Angela - .... Are u serious? Her FRENZY combined with cover and SPOTTER from Sniper Grenadiers isn't enough???

Totenmeister - even with my rules, joined to Zombies squad is deadly but not overpowered.

As you see every Hero can be excellent addition to proper unit without increasing survivability of the unit.

AS for my question about DR units - can you specify what you mean by the lots of firepower? Is there any unit which rolls loads of dices when shooting at Armour 3 units? My only ideas are Grim Reapers (9 dices) and maybe Hammerers with Rhino attached.

I was talking about what you brought up, Heroes lending their skills to the squad. Of all those that you mentioned, only the Priest's Agile fits the bill. Of course the heroes are useful by themselves, and some squads can boost them with useful skills, but still, they are not underpriced with their ability to soak a squad's initial damage.

daniello_s said:

Park a Mickey in front of Lara and her Flaks and watch them get pounded by 11 dice, without being able to do anything about it. Against the Heavy Lasers, send a squad, since they don't do much damage against infantry. On a lucky day, Red Devils with Action Jackson can be devastating. Apes and Zombies are even easier to counter, since they need to get to C range. Take potshots at them with any ranged units (a sniper bringing down an ape is a powerful blow against the unit), and keep a Wildfire well positioned to make a last Reactive Fire attack when they pounce.

The simple BBQ squad does 16 dice. Besides the game does not require that whenever a unit shoots the other is wiped out and is probably best if this is not the norm. The Axis heavies would not last long without DR or heroes.

More I'm thinking about DR more I'm sure DR shouldn't be changed.

Thanks guys.

Major Mishap said:

Correction, BBQ does at the most 12 dice against a heavy squad with a hero, Hell Boys do 14 dice (not counting knife attack).

Loophole Master said:

Don't forget knives and grenades.

I did mention them. And anyway, with knife & grenades, BBQ would deal 17 dice of damage, not 16.

daniello_s said:

You can always try to play the game ignoring the DR trait - You will see that Axis without DR completely suck. Universal truth in wargaming is - who attacks first, kills first And in Dust Tactics Allies usually attack first because of their speed and mobility. DR is supposed to counter the advantages of Move 2 Allied heavy infantry. Grim Reapers + OZZ attacking Axis heavy infantry wihout DR = happy turkey shooting.

Dakkon426 said:

Words of a Wise Man and Experienced Dust Player.

The only homerule we use in our gaming group is assigning damage from a flamethrower attack - a hero can take only one damage point from a single flaming attack, if the rest of the dealt damage can be distributed among the other members of the attacked squad. This change is supposed to increase flamers lethality - sometimes rugged targets in hard cover are completely untouchable with 'regular' methods. And since flamers are avaliable to both sides, we think that it does not affect game balance that much.

The one homerule we use is that you don't have to declare both your actions at the beginning of the turn. I find this just really confuses people and even if I say they need to do it, they don't do it anyway. Instead of saying "Move then Attack" and then doing it, they just move their unit on the board and then think about what to do next. The consequences gameplay-wise are so minimal that I find it's just not worth enforcing this rule. The only way I can see enforcing this rule is when I get units with reaction special abilities such that people use reactions on a regular basis.

The other homerule I'm thinking of implementing is that infantry units cannot jump over buildings. The idea that a unit can jump over a 3 story building but not a vehicle (that can fit inside a building) is ridiculous and confusing, so I'm thinking I might just stop infantry from being able to do this. 90% of the time they can fly through the building and have the same effect, so the game just makes more sense with this rule.

I have yet to see Damage Resilient be notably useful...

then again, I've rolled against a lot of flame throwers and phasers... which means Damage Resilient is basically just a soft cover save instead of an additional save...

The only house rule we use that a destroyed tank leaves in its square a bit of wreckage that functions like an ammo crate.

Loophole Master said:

Good one I must say. Did you think to consider this wreckage as tank trap rather than ammo crate?

We did, but we decided it was too much of a game changer. Tank traps block infantry LOS, so it was a bit much to have several of those popping up throughout the game.

Recently though, we decided that the wreckage of a heavy walker works like a tank trap. This seems to work quite well.

Loophole Master said:

The heavy walker wreckage is placed in either of the 4 squares, chosen by the walker's owner.

To represent the wreckage, we use pieces of the walkers themselves. For the allied medium walkers we simply remove the "head" and place it on the square. For the rest of the walkers we use the extra unused weapons from the walker boxes. I'm even painting and doing some battle damage to these pieces.

For the original point 1) People are not that different in how much damage they can withstand and function. I see the additional damage added by a hero as a function of their leadership helping a squad not expose itself as much, and so have a better chance of surviving more attacks. Adding extra wounds that can be absorbed does that very nicely, without adding complexity. Applying multiple wounds to a hero is just a way of saying the hero's leadership was keeping the whole squad alive longer.

For point 2) Damage Resilience can be just as effective against big guns. If a big gun round gets a direct hit on an infantry target, that infantry target is toast, but that would be the most likely case if the big gun were being stupid and firing a non-explosive anti-tank shell at the infantry. Smart gun crews would be firing explosive shells against infantry, where the shrapnel would be doing the damage, and Damage Resilience would be just as appropriate for protection. They wouldn't be firing an air burst shell like a gun that gets the 1+ style of rating, as they aren't normally trained for it, so their explosive shells would not be as dangerous, and hence allow cover and Damage Resilience. Remember that Lara's Assault is a one use skill, so after that she is chasing the enemy with a maximum move of two if she doesn't try to attack. Fast with Assault gives a one turn ability to move 5 spaces (Move doubled to 2, with one extra space from Fast).

Damage Resilience, Assault, and Fast, even with nasty heroes, can be defeated with good play. The Axis pays for Damage Resilience by not having Move 2 heavy infantry that can Jump. Reduce Damage Resilience, and you create a disparity with the Allied heavy infantry advantage.

For point 3) The Blackhawk is put out with the Axis Hans. The Hans gets a quick first turn with Scout, but then runs the game with a Move 1 and Range 3 weapons, for a threat range of four spaces (Move and Attack). The Blackhawk has Fast, so it loses one space on the first turn versus the Hans, but then has Move 2 and a range 2 weapon for an identical threat range for the rest of the game.

The Hans is nice with a one shot kill possibillity against most vehicles, and a 1+ attack against infantry, but the ability to move only one space and attack gives it a dangerous limitation.

The Blackhawk has better maneuverability with Fast, good standard anti-infantry capability (it does not ignore cover, but does not reduce damage rolled as the target unit takes casualties), and very good anti-tank or infantry capabilities with All In One. While it only gets that once per game, 10 dice in a Sustained Attack against vehicle Armor 3 or 4, 12 dice against infantry Armor 2, and 8 dice against infantry Armor 3, is a threat that can't be ignored. Even without a Sustained Attack, those are very impressive numbers. With a Sustained Attack, those numbers average the death of any of those units currently available, even considering Damage Resilience.

I don't think any of the original proposed house rules are a good idea. It's far better to learn to use the units available, or to counter the units available, through good play instead of simply changing rules without considering the balance issues that creates.