Dakkon426 said:

I don't have a problem fighting it, but I don't like to see it. I just don't feel it's in the spirit of the game, but that's my opinion.

Of course there are other reasons I'd like to se some army orgnization rules, but mostly because I just like naming and orgnizing all my army lists anyway

Dakkon426 said:

the problem isn't the spotter spam being a "weaker" army composition, because you really don't need a lot of points to do this. Lets say your first 280 points is a normal army, but then you're wondering what to do with that last 20. Would you take a 20 point infantry unit, or 4 spotter squads, gaining three extra activations? Those three extra activations are probably a lot stronger than that one 20 point unit.

You don’t need to create force build lists to deal with the “out-activate to win” armies. A very simple change would nullify that “tactic” and still keep the game simple.

At the start of each turn each player counts their units on the board, including any in/on transports. If one player has fewer units than the other, they add to their unit cards enough face-down unit cards or “pass cards” to even the difference. (If the Axis has 7 units and the Allies have 5, the allied player will place 2 face-down unit cards with the rest of his unit cards. 7-5=2) Pass cards may be activated instead of a normal unit with the following exceptions:

- You may not activate a pass card as your first activation

- You may not activate two pass cards in a row

A squad with a hero and/or commissar attached only counts as one unit when counting units at the start of the turn, since they must be activated together. If a player with one or more un-activated pass cards separate a hero from a squad the hero replaces one of the un-activated pass cards. (If the Allied player has used one of his pass cards and then separates Rhino from the Hammers, Rhino will replace the last unused pass card.)

Units are counted at the start of each turn, so as units are destroyed, the number of pass cards, and even the person receiving them may change. (The Allies have a very successful turn and manage to eliminate 3 enemy units without losing any themselves. At the start of the new turn the Axis are down to 4 units, and the Allies now have 6 since Rhino detached from the Hammers. This turn the Axis will receive 2 pass cards. 6-4=2)

fhaugh said:

Intresrting, I might give it a try, but I don't see the Dust Studio/FFG guys going for it, but you never know.

Dakkon426 said:

Well, yeah, because you play Axis, so you can just counter Observer spam with Recon Grenadier spam!

It's an interesting concept. I'd just get rid of the whole "when you dettach a hero it takes the place on an unused pass card". Dettaching a hero is a good strategy to surprise you enemy and gain an unexpected extra activation. Next round you'd lose that benefit, but it would be good to be able to have it just for the round where you dettach it.

Loophole Master said:

I second this.

I think some kind of Overwatch would go a long way to dealing with out-activation as a tactic, rather than resorting to army org charts, or whatever that wall of text was.

Well the idea of having more units and benefiting from that is kind of basic mechanic of dust tactics.

I don't think that adding those blank cards is a relaiable and game mechanic wise idea. The problem is not the out-activation but using it as a lame-ass of a strategy.

I don't fault anyone for using a high activation army in a tourney. If your there to win its the best and easiest way to stay competitive. I don't like the idea of needing specific army lists like 40k uses (1 HQ, 2 troop etc…) but simply put in multiple activations per turn to even things out. That would go a long way toward moving people away from having spotter/sniper heavy lists without over complicating the rules. The main thing that is great about Dust Tactics now is its simplicity and quickness of games. It allows you to focus more on gaining a tactical edge rather that needing to remember hundreds of pages of rules. If you look at almost every tourney winner over the last 2 years almost all of them are heavy on spotters and snipers. This needs to change as the whole tourney system will become bogged down with identical lists and make for a rather dull experience IMO…

But again, this isn't the players fault for trying to win, the fault lies with the flawed rules.

I don't mind snipers, at least they serve a purpose. Spotters just for the sake of increasing your unit count is a different story.

SeismicShock said:

If you think that was a walll of text, do you think the rules for Overwatch would be any shorter? Did you even bother to try to read any of it?

Hello folks-

So I'm excited to hear of a new box set. What I'd like to see is a remold of Bazooka Joe and Sigrid heroes so new players who weren't able to get a coffin box set can get them. They're great heroes and I'm sure I read some where that Paolo was thinking of re-releasing them in a hero pack at one time. As far as new units go, that'd be cool - who doesn't like new - but I'd rather see them rework the stats of older units to make them more viable against some of the newer units. Another light walker from the revised core set for both Allies/Germans would be cool. I still use both of them when playing larger scenarios. In fact I'd really like it if they just released them as a $15 unit alone, same with the SSU Chinese Volunteers and the SSU airlift walker. Having to spend $35 to get another version of either of those units is just not in the average players budget. Other than that I'm tapped out on ideas of what will come in the box.

As far as breaking a hero off from a unit mid game to equal out activations per round, it works. I've been doing this the past few weeks with my SSU army and it helps alot especially if you've already whitled your opponent down some.

Overwatch rules are unnecessary as they have reactive fire rules. Reactive fire works alot just like an overwatch rule would, so I don't see a reason for having two sets of rules to cover something thats already in place.

And to sum up with rules on limiting players on the amount of unit types they're allowed to play, I can't get behind this. I love fielding 3 zombie units and can't wait for the two new Ubertoten squads to be released to flesh out an entire zombie army. And if you limit how many Observers that can get fielded then you have to limit all other unit types. That would only be fair.

Thanks

Reorder-

Just to clarify, nobody involved with the game has mentioned anything about a new core set.

Loophole Master said:

We can always hope.

golem101 said:

We can always hope.

Let me tell you something, my friend. Hope is a dangerous thing. Hope can drive a man insane.

Loophole Master said:

golem101 said:

We can always hope.

Let me tell you something, my friend. Hope is a dangerous thing. Hope can drive a man insane.

That there's something inside…that they can't get to, that they can't touch. That's yours.

What are you talking about?

Hope.

Hope died last week with my phaser units and cobra getting none kills…

Do not trust to hope, it has foresaken these lands.

Loophole Master said:

The Record of Lodoss War is awesome….I need to watch it again soon.

Reorder said:

umm…think you have the wrong series, I believe that is Eomer speaking…

Bingo!

Extra activations are an issue, but the biggest issue I have with the idea of "pass" activations on a turn by turn basis comes when you realize that it will penalize players who take advantage of their opponent's error(s) and gotten a couple of kills ahead. That is a valid tactical advantage.

I lean more towards having to buy "units" similar to what is apparently in DW, although that would take a lot more variety than DW seems to give. It would take more room that I want to take up laying it out here, but IMO it would provide a lot of flexibility while limiting the chances to pile on a bunch of cheap units. Another solution might be to give a bonus for kills, say 2-3 points, which wouldn't be a big deal for having a 40 point walker, but will be prohibitive for a bunch of 5 point observer squads.

The second option retains the advantage of extra activations while rewarding the lower unit count side with extra potential points at the end of the game. Hopefully if we do get some redoing of the units, hopefully it is just points costs adjustments.

Algesan said:

If the couple of units you've killed are more than activation fillers (i.e. spotters) then you already have a tactical advantage, you now have a larger and/or superior force than they do. You shouldn't need to out-activate to finish them off.

Don't think a Pass Acivation is the way to go, I certainly wouldn't be pleased if I were disadvantaged just because I was winning a game. Also the balance would swing in favour to the guy with the high cost units. Best bet is just not to play with a guy who cheeses out his army with spotters if you don't like it or agree to restrictions like 1 spotter be artillery piece and no artillery, no spotters.