Jump to content

Reaper Steve

Members
  • Content Count

    71
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Reaper Steve

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    -
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Melbourne, FL, United States
  1. I've played this scenario as attacker and defender, and observed another match. In all 3 games, the defender quickly accumulated an insurmountable VP advantage. The defender should be gaining 8-10 VP per turn; there's no way the attacker can compete.
  2. You can also move upgrades between units. After each game, players have the chance to update their units for future games according to the rules provided for each game. Players may move upgrades between eligible units after each game.
  3. Can the Red Player CLAIM objective tokens in this scenario? The description says that the Blue Player can CLAIM in two different spots, but there's no mention of the Red Player being able to do so. If not, how does the Red Player control them? Unfortunately, "Control" is not defined in the Rules Reference. Thanks!
  4. Zombiejoe said: Germans have, on average, cheaper walkers. They also have the option of taking additional walkers, if they take the platoon upgrade. So, points allowing, in a medium sized game, the Germans could bring 6 walkers to the Allies 4. "This upgrade may only be chosen by one platoon in a force." So, there's a maximum of 5 Axis walkers to 4 Allied walkers in a 2-platoon game. The other point remains valid. On average, Axis walkers are 5 points cheaper than comparable Allied walkers.
  5. Well done! Consider adding in one of the statues available on the Dust Games site. Can't wait to see the church.
  6. DoomOnYou72 said: The no reaction to jump only applies to soldier models not vehicles (pg. 55). But yeah the Mickey is definantly worth it all the way around. Thanks for pointing that out! Fortunately, the result would have been the same in this case… the would have shot the Mickey after the move (fortunately only damaging it, not destroying it) and then it would have shot the troops. But it is good to know that there is a risk of being killed after the move before being able to attack.
  7. I decided to try the Mickey in my third and largest game (250 points) just because it has intrigued me so. It turned out to be AWESOME and was the lynchpin of my assault! Truly the Mickey is greater than the sum of its parts. Jump + Fast let me move over a wall and well within range of the enemy front lines. They couldn't react thanks to jump. It then suppressed the snot out of a key enemy unit (while taking two damage from an attack reaction) to buy time for my supporting foot troops to double move into position for the next round. The Mickey survived the spearhead maneuver, allowing my Fireball to Air Drop 12" from the enemy front lines and for Bazooka Joe and a squad of combat rangers with extra bazooka to disembark. (Yeah, my opponent was rather shocked by that, especially since the disembarks got to attack as well!) On the next round, the Mickey was obliterated by the Konigsluther. The crew sold their lives bravely. The sacrifice was not in vain, as their valor allowed the Fireball, Bazooka Joe & his squad, and the supporting foot troops to dominate that side of the board. The enemy was off balance, never to recover. Basically, the Mickey's spearhead defined the battle and enabled victory! Next battle, I want two!
  8. 536RodneySmith said: Reaper Steve said: I agree with a lot of your notes, cards have been updated and re-upped. Might have missed some things (doing this late at night sometimes affects my consistency), so if you see anything not changed, let me know. Glad to be of service! I hope to have time tomorrow for another round of review.
  9. locarno said: Bazooka Joe fixed and uploaded! Les Thanks, Les! I'll be putting him in action in about an hour! Steve
  10. Rodney, Rolled is misspelled on the Blackhawk card (part of All in One) Find & replace all "tokens" with "markers" to match the rule terminology. See examples below. Find & replace most "takes" with "gains" to match rules terminology and for better readability. See examples below. Sometimes you used "reverse combat dice" (Grim Reapers Rocket Punch), others you used "invert the combat dice" (Punisher 155mm Howitzer.) Recommend you standardize to one or the other. (I like the reverse.) Cards affected: Grim Reapers, Punisher, Fireball This is a very minor nit to pick, but I recommend you change the wording of Reload. "Takes Out of Ammo token when fired…" reads oddly to me. The rulebook says "Place an Out of Ammo marker beside the unit…" That should fit since Reload takes two lines on your cards. If you want to be more succinct, I suggest "Unit gains an Out of Ammo marker." Cards affected: Death Dealers Additional Support: "Platoon may include one additional Support Unit (Ranger Observer Team or Ranger Sniper Team.)" The "+1" version is rather nebulous and I think it's important to acknowledge that it counts as extra Support since some platoons can take these guys as regular sections. Agile… change "take an additional 6" to "Moves an additional 6"" (which matches the book.) Cards affected: Crack shots Fast: "move an additional 6" when it takes a Move action" This matches the rules and follows the same format as Agile while getting rid of a "+". Here "take" is perfectly valid! Cards affected: Hell Boys Grenade launchers: "Unit always takes suppression" would be better as "target unit always gains a suppression marker." Cards affected: Death Dealers, Hell Boys Carry Capacity: "Disembarked units must be placed within 3" of the transport." Also, "gain a reaction marker." Cards affected: Fireball, Punisher I think I have an issue with the word take. It's not one you see often in game rules and there's other words more specific to each situation that work better. "Gain a marker; move extra, etc." I would consider using takes for something like the "unit may take an additional action." (I'm editing this frequently as I check each card, in the order listed in your dropbox. I have to take a break for now.)
  11. Yeah, I thought I was a genius for trying it. My opponent disagreed with it's validity. It was our first game and I was the only one with a rulebook, so I elected not to do it. Next time… no more Mr. Nice Guy!
  12. Hey guys, We encountered a timing issue with issuing orders. Must all orders be issued at the very beginning of the command phase based off everyone's current positions, or do you evaluate positions as each order is given? Here's the rule: "A unit must normally have at least one of its miniatures within 12" of a Command Section's Unit Leader to receive an Order…" Here's the setup: At the beginning of the command phase, the closest figure of the Gunners squad I want to issue an order to is 16" away from my command section's leader (and therefore out of the 12" command range.) Is it legal to first issue a Move order to the command squad and move it so that the leader is now within 12" of the Gunners squad and then issue that squad its own order? (assuming I have at least two orders to give, and no special rules, like Radioman, are available.) Or, are the Gunners ineligible to receive an order at all that turn since they started the turn outside of command range?
  13. Iocarno: thanks! thejughead: your most recent pic just shows as a '?' to me and clicking on it I get a "Safari can't open this page."
  14. I really want to use a Mickey because I like the idea of Jump + Fast on a walker, but I'm afraid it won't be able to hold it's own. I know it's not meant for tank duels or front of the line action, but I just wonder if its even worth the points, especially in smaller games. Tomorrow I'm playing a 150 pt game followed by a 250 pt game; with only 2-3 walkers in the force, I feel like I need more firepower. Any experience or thoughts? Thanks.
  15. blkdymnd said: Whoops, missed that you weren't using your own printer… sorry I almost did, but $0.10 each is probably less than it would cost me on my own printer!
×
×
  • Create New...