Jump to content

drmabuse00

Members
  • Content Count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About drmabuse00

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    www.fortressat.com
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    , BC, Canada
  1. Dam said: Three Headed Monkey said: It does seem wierd. It follows the letter of the rules exactly but it still seems wierd. I cant think of a fluff reason to disallow this, gameplay balance must be the only reason. And even then, it I'm not sure why exactly. Come on, you know those Primarchs, all high and mighty, wouldn't be caught dead travelling with the rank and file . They'd want their own, pimped out THs. Three Headed Monkey said: Also, no mention on whether or not Khan can move through areas containing enemy units when resolving his ability. My thoughts are that he doesnt suddenly become a flying unit, but still, clarification would be nice. I'm in the camp that he moves like a flying unit (that is, can move through enemy unit areas) without becoming one (simulates his ability for fast attacks, using the land, mobility, etc.). Personally, I think that Khan's ability should be comparable to the timing of flying units not the actual movement ability of going through (or over) enemy units. Hopefully this can be resolved sooner rather than later.
  2. There are a number of reasons why you may not have heard back from them, but I agree with Three Head, just try again. In my experience FFG has been AMAZING with their customer service.
  3. Being as I am one of the people who has made such a post ,I can say that I have heard nothing from FFG in response to my email questions. As to when an official FAQ will be posted, that's anyone's guess.
  4. Dam said: Kinda funny that you can't Drop Pod into a neutral area. IIRC, you can do a Port Landing at a neutral spaceport. Not having the card in front of me but had the card said "must be placed..." then I would say you couldn't land them in a neutral area. As it's a movement card, it's stating that you can break the normal rules for movement in it's various forms with the one exception.
  5. haslo said: drmabuse00 said: That's one thing that bothers me about the bombardment deck. I'm probably going to house-rule that after the set-up draws the deck gets reshuffled and again during the each order draw phase. You can do that if you want a random result (in fact, if you really want a random result, you can use a combat result table instead and throw dice, or shuffle the deck between every draw). The way it is with this deck however also balances things out a bit in the short run: Long-term distributions of results are exactly the same, but in the short term, if individual cards are always either better for the imperial or the traitor player (and not one aspect of a card is different from another, like eagle cards with high bombardment values and breach would be), this means that you can count on every "cluster" of 32 random results being fair for both sides. So it retains the same random results overall, but reduces standard deviation and variance for both sides - essentially yielding both a bit less randomness and better predictability towards the end of a stack, and less runs of good random results only for one side. In short, using cards instead of dice makes things more fair in the short (cluster of 32 random choices) term. Edit: If on the other hand you shuffle the deck every so often between the times the deck runs out, you increase randomness a lot and also increase standard deviation and variance over and above if you'd use dice or shuffle between every draw. You'll make things a lot more wildly random and increase the odds of one side winning through lucky draws. If that's what you want, fine. If it isn't and you want to value skill over luck, shuffle only when the deck runs out. 2nd edit: This is assuming that indeed individual cards are either benefitting the imperial or the traitor player overall. If they're mixed, it's all out of the window. I haven't checked. I'm am not someone who shies away from randomness. There's plenty of skill needed in order to adjust to luck whether good or bad,( I'm a fan of MMP's Warriors of God after all). As a CRT is not added to the game this is not an option, which frankly I'm glad of. For me games that try to implement "fairness" in it's structure bores (I'm not a fan of Eurogames) and card-counting seems to go against the spirit of the game. Personally, excitement comes from being thrown curveballs and having to adjust my game play. There are other aspects of the game that have greater importance for instance managing the Init. track & area control. It makes sense to have some control during the set-up phase as Horus is assaulting and has the upper-hand initially, but as the game progresses being able to predicate your choice due to whatever's been played seems too contrived to me. I understand that other players aren't like me, which is why I said that I would house rule it. To each, their own.
  6. Dam said: Palpatine said: Since precise hits have a 37,5% chance of causing a breach vs. 18.8% for reckless, I would in this case allways choose precise. It's still a gamble, but the odds are on getting one when drawing two cards. -P That is from a full B-deck though? Scenario 1 for example, you'll draw 16 cards during setup already (that's half the deck IIRC), so one has to take into account those cards already drawn and their effects (IIRC, those with Chaos star have Reckless dmg, those with Imp Eagle are all "no effect" with Reckless). Of course, you can only see the top card of the deck, so have to keep a running tally in your head about which cards have gone and which haven't. That's one thing that bothers me about the bombardment deck. I'm probably going to house-rule that after the set-up draws the deck gets reshuffled and again during the each order draw phase.
  7. In the combat example on page 29, during the fourth iteration, it states that the Fabricator General receives 2 points of damage from a Thunderhawk Bombardment. Later on, under the section Thunderhawk Bombardment it states that "Thunderhawk bombardment damage never affects Heroes. Is the example incorrect? From BGG: When a Thunderhawk transports units and Heroes does the Hero (and his retinue) take up one of the two spaces or can they tag along for free?
  8. Pretoriane said: ... Anyone else feel the same way? No, but being a fan of these kind of games, I know what to expect. The rules for this game are fairly well laid out as they give you plenty of examples (one may be erroneous) and pictures to illustrate their points. Good luck to you.
  9. You may want to read the example again. It clearly states: "He plays " Rain of Death," draws a bombardment card... etc"
  10. Knowing very few details about the 40K Universe what is "The Emperor's Tarot" and what is it's purpose?
  11. In the combat example on page 29, during the fourth iteration, it states that the Fabricator General receives 2 points of damage from a Thunderhawk Bombardment. Later on, under the section Thunderhawk Bombardment it states that "Thunderhawk bombardment damage never affects Heroes. Is the example incorrect?
×
×
  • Create New...