I tried this mission the other night. Before we had rolled a die, it became obvious that the non-Koshka player can't win. You have 8 turns to get 16 spaces (assuming optimal route) with your walker, in order to secure the VK and get off the board on the designated spot. Most walkers can move 2 spaces a turn. If your walker has to stop for any reason or is prevented from moving at full speed for a turn, or destroyed even once, you cannot possibly win. If the non-Koshka player does not win in 8 turns, Koshka wins. It is basically impossible for the non-Koshka player to pull this off, unless their opponent doesn't field any units and lets them move unmolested, in which case they could win on the last turn. Perhaps an airdropped SSU walker might pull it off, under ideal conditions, but that is about it.

Please tell me I am incorrect or missing something. Otherwise this mission wasn't playtested very well.

We house-ruled the time limit to 12 turns but Koshka still won, owing to the time limit.

Sorry for the multiple posts, my screen appeared to be frozen.

Well, I don't know the layout of the mission, but there are walkers with the Scout or Fast ability that can cover 16 squares in 6-7 rounds. Use other units to clear their path and keep them moving. If you get a command squad and are lucky with "Get Moving", you could get t the objective pretty quickly.

The mission map is 3 tiles long by 2 wide, with a one-square corridor running down either side of the exact center top space. The corridor is made of impassible squares going 4/6 of the way down the center of the board, so it channels whoever wants to get the VK into the corridor where you can easily be blocked in. Take a look at the scenario and you'll see the issue.

Well, I don't have Zverograd yet, so…

If the senario is unballaced, then change the mission peramitters.

Panzer soldier said:

You shouldn't have to though its supposed to have been playtested to give a balanced game, how much playtesting do we have to do to get it right.?, There's probably an error again, send them an email and wait a month.

A walker with fast, scout or assault along with a command squad shouldn't have too awful of a time. With Fast you can do it in just over 5 turns without getting reactivated. Scout and Assault would save you an entire turn. And you should be able to count on atleast 2 "Get Moving" reactivations over the course of an 8 turn game. Should be close, but I doubt the mission would be much fun if it wasn't.

I would probably bring a Mickey and the Boss if I were playing this mission…But I pretty much always bring a Mickey and a Boss anyway.

Granted, the axis would have a harder time with this mission, since their only walker with extra movement is the Hans with its Scout ability.

This is true, atleast until the Flame walker comes out! Still, Hans can pull it off in 7 turns without being rectivated by the Kommandotruppe, which you could be pretty sure will work for you around twice a game in an 8 turn game. That means it should be able to get their in around ~5 turns.

Jowimus said:

If the Flamm-Luther has Fast or Assault I'll be quite ticked at how outdated the Hot Dog has become. The only short-range unit in the game with no movement skills whatsoever, and costing a whopping 36AP!

Loophole Master said:

The description of the Flamm Luther in Zverograd says that it has Assault. So likely 2 flamers, higher armor, and assault for…~50 points?

Yeah, I have no idea how they came to the conclusion that the Hot Dog should be more than the Mickey, but not have Fast or Self Repair. It would probably still be overcosted even if it had both of those.

Yeah, it's a pity. I like the Hot Dog, but it's just not cost-effective at that price, since it's really hard to use the napalm without some movement boost. And even then, the Napalm is not all that powerful, being the same as a normal flamethrower, only with better range (and honestly, in all my games I don't think I was ever able to hit two targets at once more than a couple of times). The Loth has Charge and even it costs the same as a light walker. I can't really justify the inclusion of a Hot Dog in my army unless I'll be defending my end of the board from short-range attacks.

Yeah, Hot Dog looks lame comparing to other choices and should get update.

Flamm-Luther won't cost more than 40 pts as it is not long-range walker. Sure it's gonna be tougher a bit and have 2x flamer but still you need to get close to the target which will expose you to the counter-attack. If it cost 40+ pts I wouldn't bother taking him to my army (sadly).

This bring me to one of my biggest wish/beef with rules today. Just what is this magic formula they use to arrive at the point values?

Wouldn't it be nice to have this formula. You could customize units, and kit them out the way you want. Now that would be cool!

I remember reading an old 2nd addition 40k article were a guy asked them how they arrived at point values? The answer was we play test it a bit and decide what we think the value should be!

I think this may be the case with Dust as well, “weeeak!”

Actually, I think that's how it should be done. With all the interplay of weapons, attributes and skills, I think it's impossible to create a really solid formula that will work every time. The best way to do it is to play with the unit enough that you really get to know it, then ask yourself: at what cost would I not want to include this in my army?

Loophole Master said:

So you are saying that play testing constitutes some sort of formula? This alone seems a little random to me.
A true formula would be to assign values to all these attributes. Then you play test your formula.
Now this takes time, but in the end you don't have to muse about anything the answer is their for you.

Many on this site complain about how the Hotdog is not worth fielding anymore because its points do not reflect it's abilities.
This would not have accrued with a formula, and is an exultant example of how perceptions can change.
Play testing should be used as a tweak not as a method.

One of the things I like about Dust the most is the ability to field the game pieces I want. Lets take this to the next level and assign values to weapons and abilities. You could kit out your own vehicles, and design your own unit combinations. You could even make your own heroes.

This is what hoped to see in warfare, which was supposed to be revolutionary. It just strikes me as a lesser 40K.

I'm saying that a forumula would have to be darned complex to really work. You'd have to take into consideration the interplay of weaponry, skills and stats. You can't just give a hard value to something like "Fast". Giving it to the Hot Dog would be a VERY valuable addition, while giving it to the Grim Reapers would be an almost negligible improvement.

Loophole Master said:

That's where the playtesting comes in, it's ok to have a fixed point value for items but 99% of the time these will need to be adjusted in someway. Even the same weapon on a medium mech is worth more than if its on a light mech as in theory it should last longer and get more shots off. So, basically it's nigh impossible just to have a hard set of points values for items without adjustments.

No formula can account for everything in a dynamic game, especially with new units being added relatively often(which can drastically affect the formula). For example, if the formala says that assault is worth X, then wouldn't it be actually more useful on certain units that have abilities/weapons like fast, charge, CC weapons, or flamethrowers? And wouldn't the cost of Assault be in flux if FFG were to release more units with abilities like Advanced Reactive fire, or more Range U weapons (or whatever)? IMO, the route of eyeballing the points costs and adjusting as needed (the route FFG has taken) is the better route because it is more adaptable to changes in the game/meta balance.

I have no problem with FFG just updating the tournament cost PDF on a roughly quarterly/biannual basis. This in my mind is similar to what CCGs do when they update their restricted/banned list and more easily allows the game to evolve over time.

Yes, and all in all most costs seem very appropriate. There are only really a few units that I feel have the wrong value, and I wish they would update some of the costs.

I agree that most of the costs seem appropriate. I can really only name a handful of units that are overpriced and even they aren't exactly completely worthless, simply not great values.

And I think Lara is underpriced at a meager 21. Recon Boys are a tad overpriced. And the heavy walkers could be cheaper in general.

I concede that completely pointing out everything in dust would be difficult. However even a basic formula that attaches values to stats ranges and damage, can get you close to rite.
As I said then the play test is then only a tweak of plus or minus five points. As for the skills play testing is the only way I can think of to point these out. Skills do give the game flavor, but some times I think their a bit over the top.
Anyway I love to customize my models some sort of points system would allow the model to fight cool not just look cool. You can't tell me you guys haven't wanted customize your own walkers?

Back on topic… yes, whoever has Koska wins, especially if they get to place the cover, just put the tank traps in the entrance - game over.