View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently December 14th, 2017, 4:18 pm



Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 
 8th July Rules Packet Tests 
Author Message
Denizen
User avatar

Joined: September 9th, 2012, 1:25 am
Posts: 320
Location: Australia
Hi All,

Another week of testing underway. This week I will be struggling to get more than 1 maybe two games in as I head back to work. Thanks to UrbanGargoyle being in town we got a game in today.

Void (Champion) vs Doctrine
Game Length:
3 hours (One player very familiar with the units, one not very experienced with them.)
Size: 50 pts:
Result: 6-3 to the Void.

Cadres:
Habronath & Keruv RK
Amelial Herald of the Void
Void Witch (Upgraded)
Ophanim (Upgraded)
3 Cherubim

Kisa and Scratch RK
DS Zineda
DS Bang Bang
3 Academy Guard (Upgraded)
3 Novitiates

Terrain
Image

Questions:
Do squads still get cover for at least half their models being in cover? (Yes eventually found the rule on Page 32 instead of on page 30 when talking about targeting squads.)

Kisa's Arcane Lore trait we have been playing as all 3 cards go on the top or on the bottom. Is this correct?

Do flying models take falling damage? (Played yes, but feel the answer should be no thematically.)

When is the number of cards in hand for the attacks like Harbonath's Reap and Void Witch's Void Hex checked? (Played as "Step 5: Resolve Hit Effects")

When is the number of cards in hand checked for Ophanim's Rift Claws press checked? (Didn't matter as it was the same at all steps.)

When is the number of cards in hand checked for Herald Amelial's Sorrow press? (Didn't come up directly in play so didn't have to decide, but would seem to be Step 5 due to the damage but...)

General Feedback:
Page 6 activation call out is good.

Engagement Rules: Much easier to understand. However the rule that says to just measure from the base is strange. A Size 4 model can stand beside a Size 3 terrain piece and another model on top of the terrain cannot be attacked by the Size 4 model and nor can it attack the Size 4 model. This would be resolved by making vertical engagement 2"+Size of target measured from the base.

Line of Sight issues still persist. (Especially as a Size 3 object more than 3" from Size 4 and Size 3 models still blocks LoS between them due to the word "either". Then there remain the issues with standing on large objects and then ignoring them for LoS.)

Page 14 the yellow text about Collateral Damage should have the same text as page 8 at the end of Forced Movement.

Removal of Hero Shielding.
To be honest I thought this was going to be a really tough thing to manage without, instead it gave me a lot more flexibility in deployment and solved a bunch of targeting issues. It also made Scratch's trait matter in a positive, rather than negative, way consistently. I'd like to play more games to try this out more, but initial efforts seem rewarding.

Gambler, Bloodthirsty and Killmarks.
These three traits seem problematic. In cadres built around exploiting them the problems may not be as apparent as once they start hitting the Void Faction (While I expect some problems with the Radiant traits, these 3 are much more of an issue.)

Bloodthirsty and Killmarks are problematic as they create situations where it is undesirable to have anything but one type of attack on cards and can be unusable at different times as a result. I suspect Bloodthirsty would be better if you got it for attacking a damaged unit and Killmarks for attacking units that you can draw LoS to with another unit (though that might be too easy). For a start both then become more thematic to the armies and less restrictive in strategy and for unit choices with these being tied to the effectiveness of Knights and Avatars.

Gambler is a low odds token generator that is supposed to have a large pay off. For a start every time you draw a Wild or Void card you lower your chances of getting effect from Gambler even in a Cadre built on Gambler. In a Cadre like Void it is even worse - because to make it effective you need to play SNC in Void Clothing. The secondary problem with Gambler is then making the pay off from the Knight/Avatar large enough to justify the low frequency of triggering, which the Void Knights/Avatars are not engineered to do because they need to work with a wider array of tokens (or ignore tokens as Tahariel does). I think Gambler would be much improved and much easier to balance across the board if the Flip was changed to the Armor colour of the unit. This moves it from 6 cards to 15 and makes it a desirable, if random, outcome that will be potentially triggered regularly.

Game End:
The game ended when UrbanGargoyle couldn't stop the Cherubim from scoring the last point by activating on an objective giving me 3 points from unit kills and 3 from objectives. This did not require playing through his last turn as he had not activatable units that could stop the point being scored. (We didn't consider this a problem with the game end.)

Void Units:
There has been discussion in the past 24 hours or so on FB about the conflict between the use of Drain and the requirement that many Void units have to have fewer cards in hand than the target to maximise their attack's effect (which is why I played them). The timing of when the number of cards in hand is checked is then critical to the efficacy of the units. That said playing with the most disadvantageous application of the timing the traits seemed to be entirely pointless, regardless of the presence of Drain or not, the opponent can essentially prevent damage by playing cards from hand on defence, which significantly increases the value of doing so against the attacks?

Harbonath: The 3P for Overcharge on Reap feels excessive, especially given how readily Sebastian can access it. Otherwise he seems fine, though he might just be a little too hard to kill with Guard and readily triggered Armor.
Dark Designs seems like it is a stronger trait for playing Villain than Champion. More games needed to make a definite conclusion about this.
Esper Vampire is the same as the Void Avatar's Void Victor and isn't particularly representative of the old Harbonath's Shadows ability which seems perfectly implementable based on tokens and would leave the Avatar with the Drain and thus being more unique. That said this trait was used about 4 times through the game due to the problems with Bloodthirsty and Killmarks tokens.

Keruv: Was just used as a card engine and only moved near the end of the game to increase the threat of scoring off the primary objective.

Void Witch: Her upgrade was well worth the point, and is again an upgrade I don't think I would play the unit without. I believe at Damage 6 her Void Hex is fine even if it lost the "more cards" bonus.

Cherubim: I admit that if I have 6 points to spend on 1 unit in a Void Cadre I would be hard pressed not to spend it on these. 6 points gets me 4 Health 5 models with E Draw 2 as a minion, its still a great deal at 4 points and only 3 models! Their Knockback was a critical play point 2 times in the game, prohibiting key activations by UrbanGargoyle (which likely snowballed into the final game state). Damage output wise at 3 models they seemed to be about right. I don't think I would really want to see them above 4 models in a Squad to be honest as at that point the returns are probably getting too high.

Amelial Herald of the Void: Abyssal Portent sounds really good on paper, and on a table with little terrain or where a bunch of enemies grouped up (which seems less likely without Hero Shielding) it could be as it doesn't really have a cost. It might be better, given the low chance it will do anything, if it allowed you to discard the card shown as well. This is a great example of something that I feel could benefit from a Collateral Damage icon as well, or just the inclusion of the adjective Collateral before the Damage 2, so that it is clear that the damage follows the Collateral Damage rules and players know where to look up how to resolve it. Armor 1 with a Press for Armor 2 felt worthless when the model took most of their damage from being pulled off buildings and into objectives and then got hit for 11 damage which was equal to their remaining health plus maximum Armor.

Ophanim: Firstly the unit seems to be confused; its base attacks seem to favor melee over ranged but its 2nd activation trait is for ranged and it has Kill Marks. Secondly I don't think I would field it without the Upgrade. The costs on the 2 ranged attacks are the same, the damage on Bleak Cannon is in the expected range for a single model unit and the ability to maybe get it off 2x in an activation is great. I think Rift Driver and Rift Claws need to swap their Press.

_________________
Australian Soda Pop Community On Facebook
South East QLD Relic Knights on Facebook


July 8th, 2017, 8:05 am
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 1 post ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by STSoftware.