Jump to content



Photo

Artillery & Airstrikes


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 yemble

yemble

    Member

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 22 March 2012 - 01:48 PM

So, it always frustrated me with how weak artillery and airstrikes were in the game.  So my friends and I started a new house rule.  We tried to keep things simple without going overboard. 

So now, with normal Artillery and Airstrike cards, you roll the same amount of die to see how many casualties your opponent takes, you then conduct a suppressive round of combat.   This way you can eliminate units and you also pin or disrupt your opponent.  When we played we did not rout units this way, though it was a concern that these units could be routed too easily.  I think this makes artillery and airstrikes adequately more powerful than your mortar crews.

With suppressive Artillery attacks we have not come up with a really clean fix, though we were considering allowing suppressive attacks to conduct a "normal" attack with reduced dice, say 1/2 the numbe of dice for the normal attack.

 

What do you think of this possibility?



#2 Grand Stone

Grand Stone

    Member

  • Members
  • 425 posts

Posted 23 March 2012 - 12:04 AM

So, in other words you get both a normal and a suppressive attack using the same attack? I kind of like it.

My experience with artillery is that it might be fairly potent, if you are lucky and you use it correctly. For example I used it once to make two lightly damaged shermans become heavily damaged. It was one of these game changing situations. In that game artillery obviusly played a crittical role in the scenario. However, I was only able to use artillery effectively once. And maybe thats where the frustration is all about. In 9 out of 10 times, you will do very little damage. Either the card scatters,  you cannot get contact with the artillery, you only have suppressive cards which you dont need, you roll badly for damge, the enemy is not in wouderable spot etc. etc.  

I think that the general overal picture is that artillery is underpowered, but air-power is fairly decent. Basicly due to the 'no scattering' rule, and maybe due to the +1dice cards available for air power. I havent played that much with air, but  do people agree?

 

What irritates me was the lack of control and that things are to random. For example as a defender, espesially if your opponent has the initiative, you realy seldom need suppressive fire.  Thus many of the artillery cards are useless. In addition the realy realy usefull artillery cards which gives you less scattering and that artillery cards cost less, you might get it first or last. If you get them early its realy nice, if you get them late, well it comprimises the entire artillery for the entire scenario. That randomness kind of sucks.

Making all cards both suppressive & normal would take away the randomness in 'damn, I dont have one of the two cards I need' randomness.  And would general make more cards usefull for a larger varrity of situations.



#3 neu.descolado

neu.descolado

    Member

  • Members
  • 35 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 04:39 AM

 

What irritates me was the lack of control and that things are to random. For example as a defender, espesially if your opponent has the initiative, you realy seldom need suppressive fire. Thus many of the artillery cards are useless. In addition the realy realy usefull artillery cards which gives you less scattering and that artillery cards cost less, you might get it first or last. If you get them early its realy nice, if you get them late, well it comprimises the entire artillery for the entire scenario. That randomness kind of sucks.

 

Making all cards both suppressive & normal would take away the randomness in 'damn, I dont have one of the two cards I need' randomness. And would general make more cards usefull for a larger varrity of situations.

 

Nice point of view my dear Grand Stone.

 



#4 TheKaiser33

TheKaiser33

    Member

  • Members
  • 39 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 07:52 AM

I agree that the artillery cards are often underpowered.  I do like the idea of them causing both types of damage.  Do you roll the normal / suppressive attack separately or use the same results?

Example:
Artillery Card A is a normal area attack of (5).

1) You roll 5 normal attack dice at a targeted hex

Option A: Those same dice are used for a suppressive area attack against that hex as well

Option B: After the normal attack is resolved, then a suppressive attack is rolled against that same hex.

Should the number of dice for the suppression depend on the number of hits rolled by the attacker?  Since the number of casualties would then be tied to the amount of suppression.

1) You roll 5 normal attack dice at a targeted hex and roll 3 hits and 2 misses.

2) You would finish resolving that normal attack against the unit(s) in that hex (opponent rolls blocking dice, removes casualties, etc).

3) Regardless of whether your opponent rolled any blocks, you would then roll 3 suppressive dice against that hex and then resolve.

 

Would you then do the opposite for the suppressive artillery cards?

Another idea would be to half the opposite effect of the card.

1) Artillery one - Area Attack (6) - normal attack (6) + Suppressive Attack (3)

2) Artillery two - Suppressive Area Attack (5) - Suppressive attack (5) + normal attack (3)






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS