|
|
Post by El Capitan on Aug 22, 2006 11:48:26 GMT 1
I was wondering what would happen if you brought the flanks in to say 18" as opposed to 12. For one it would make the battles a bit bloodier in the centre, but would it make flanks and manoeuvering into them more important? Or would they just become a large uneventful No-Man's Land? he bigger the table though the more insignificant a flank seems in its size, and it also adds more emphasis to the deployment roll on account of the larger deployment zone. On the contrary it could just make concentrated fire armies incredibly powerful.
what do people think?
|
|
Simon
Unydun
Fantasy & Magic Champion 2005. Leeds co-ordinator
Spongeman
Posts: 693
|
Post by Simon on Aug 22, 2006 20:47:17 GMT 1
Not a big fan of the idea. Large armies need the big deployment zones to actually get onto the table without being a complete shambles. It would be like suggesting having a 3 turn game. Manouvering is mega important in the game, but deployment is how you can control your manouvres better. Being bunched up is something I have to face most of the time anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by tturen on Aug 23, 2006 2:14:49 GMT 1
I'm not a fan of shrinking the DZ either and I agree that large armies would be adversly effected. I always had some trouble finding room for all my IG models at 2000 points. More models in a smaller area also has the ring of a HW turkey shoot and thats something 2nd Ed already has a spot of trouble with. Not that just dropping 6" a side would cause devastation but it would agrivate an existing problem.
|
|
Adoni-Zedek
Unydun
From the Crossroads of the West...
Posts: 551
|
Post by Adoni-Zedek on Aug 23, 2006 19:52:00 GMT 1
I wouldn't mind extending the flanks out, in effect making the whole table wider. If you normally play on a 6 ft table, switching to an 8' table with 18" flanks wouldn't be bad (deployment zones go from 4' to 5' wide)
On a totally different subject, do the Brittish versions of the game still use inches for range? Or do they use centimeters (appropriately converted, of course. A move of 4" becomes 10 cm)?
|
|
|
|
Post by El Capitan on Aug 23, 2006 23:42:32 GMT 1
Only LOTR has measurements in cm, and it gives measurements for both (making for ugly looking profiles). We always use inches for that, at least we do in Liverpool, not sure about Leeds. Id be intersted to ses wider flanks, just to see what happens, i can just see a marine army climbing into Rhino's and fleeing into a far corner and then laying down massive fire as you strive to approach them  |
|
|
|
Post by tturen on Aug 24, 2006 5:01:08 GMT 1
On a 6ft table I would extend the flanks. In fact at 2000 points or more I'd want the whole table edge. Extending the DZ would be interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by James 40K Champ *** on Aug 24, 2006 19:54:49 GMT 1
Hmmm.. tricky. Guess a little play testing would help clarify the matter.
Not sure what to think myself
|
|
|
|
Post by LukeG on Sept 5, 2006 14:59:09 GMT 1
I think the best way to acheive that effect is just a bigger table. Manouvering in the tournament seemed to amount to one big crunch in the centre, unless it happens to be a refused flank strategy then the head on collision happens off on one flank instead. I never do well head to head and all my best performances have come when an opponant has left me room to manouver, I'd like to see more options and therefore more table so I can at least attempt to force a battle onto my terms rather then being stuck in a dragnet everytime a half decent player spreads out.
|
|
|
|
Post by LukeG on Sept 5, 2006 15:00:24 GMT 1
PS, this relates to the 5' we have been using, I need to get to a Monday and see if that extra 12" can make the difference but an 8' table is my holy grail.
|
|
|
|
Post by El Capitan on Sept 5, 2006 15:24:15 GMT 1
We now have a 6 X 4 table in Liverpool ,though we need some big city scenery. At the moment we've got all the forge world pieces that are quite low
|
|
|
|
Post by tturen on Sept 8, 2006 5:48:00 GMT 1
Every game we play is on an 8ft table for a 6ft deployment zone. Stuffing my 2000 points of IG into that area required some thought so all the units had fire lanes and or room to manuever. With smaller armies this was much simpler but my Wolves in particular always valued the flanks the 8ft table provides. Those areas made marine armor like Predators even more effective. Most of the other units though didn't need the extra table space outside the DZ but the size of the DZ itself has always been critical to our game play. A shorter table would impact our game play a little if combined with a smaller DZ the impact would be considerable.
|
|
|
|
Post by James 40K Champ *** on Sept 12, 2006 12:55:57 GMT 1
I agree larger flanks are a good thing, allowing certain units to utilise thier full potential.. like vehicles.
Will also make it harder to see where every attack will come from, only having 2-3 approaches on the enemy can only be a bad thing.. having the option to throw an assult in right from the flank is very good
|
|
