Some thoughts from Adepticon, 3 2k pt games, which was a well run event imo: Composition: * I find that mixed arms make the game more interesting. More infantry, melee and shooting both, Dreadnoughts, tarantulas. Deep strikes. I'm looking forward to mixing in jetbikes and other speedy things. Just tanks shooting at each other, there's not much to it. The most exciting thing can be a good or a bad roll. * Planes and Titans don't add much spice either, they're effective but too rock-paper-scissorsy to be interesting; you either take them down with AA or overwhelming firepower, or don't interact with them all game and accept that you'll lose things every now and again. Table: * We played 2k games at 4x4" and they didn't feel as packed. There was less terrain all over. More than AT, but not this much. * Also, craters and forests add spice that goes beyond just buildings; you can see through them, different things are differently able to move through etc. Infantry and tanks can * I'm ok with the scoring system, but, I play infantry a lot, and my local meta does too. Infantry dies easy. Make sure there are no garrisonable buildings within each objective and things start to die and swing. Yeah, the game is still ~decided after a few rounds, once a player starts edging towards tabled. But the rounds before that can be more exciting with a few changes to the table and army composition. I agree that the game doesn't match AT in quality, but I think there's more enjoyement to be squeezed out of it than could be seen here. I hope this helps. I enjoyed the batrep anyway and I hope to see more. Cheers
Rather than remove buildings, tech your list to be able to reliably demolish one or two civitas a turn. Your opponents will soon realise these things are death traps and would rather face the music outside of them. The game then becomes interesting late game as you will want to ensure you maintain this ability to avoid one or two stands entering a key building and becoming a problem.
32:28 I think part of the car parking comes from neither player having proper melee units (eg those with Rend) and partly from neither player Infiltrating. It still happens, but not quite so much.
We play 2k on 6x4 and it spreads the game out a lot more. The objectives are not so close and you don’t car park as much. Also sometimes less scenery is better. We have also stopped using just buildings and started using woods, craters, etc much better experience.
Knights solve the car park problem, they excell in melee vs tanks, being able to wipe out 4-5 in a single round. Also a lack of melee options or enough infantry stands to outnumber the tanks 3:1, infantry are really only a threat to tanks in melee. If any of the objectives had an overlap with a building, car parking tanks also becomes unfeasable, as it would be super ineffecient to outcap infantry with tanks Still a valid problem with the system tho, but not something impossible for the player to elleviate with their list
The positioning of objectives and the way the scoring works means that you actually play on a much smaller table than 4*4. A couple of ideas that could improve this: (i) Deployment zones of 6 inches by 24 inches or right angle triangle of 18 inches by 18 inches in opposite corners and objectives span across the corner to corner diagonal lines of the table - this makes more use of the full table as the diagonal lines are longer than the vertical and horizontal. (ii) Objectives only score from turn 3 and escalate in value each turn - would make games last a little longer rather than throwing everything forwards in a suicide rush.
With the Assault Marines there, they still roll Morale from Overwatch and if failed lose the Charge Order. The move is still completed and still become Engaged for later in the turn, but they lose the CAF bonuses.
I don't like these tournament style objectives in any of GW's games. It makes all games feel too similar. I think it just stands out more in Legions cause there's less factions. The game system feels more old school... I'm having way more fun with it playing oldschool scenarios or making up narratives.
I might have this wrong?, but I think you make a morale check if you lose close combat and only if the morale check is failed do you have to withdraw from the combat.
Commenting on the carpark issue. In this case i can see the terrain amplifies the issue. All the walls and the small gaps in them makes the effective playing area 2*2. If your an armageddon player i can understand the feeling of it being crampt. But me as an old epic player i dont have a problem with it, we used to play with a lot of stuff. :) Incorporating a version of the old victory points for killing might also make it a bit mor fun. Like you get 1Vp for every full 100p. This and using the All Out War missions way for deploying objectives but with a normal deployment zone for deploying units might be fun and is probably how we will end up plying it normaly for gaming day, we will also be playing it on a 4*6.
i just came back from an LI tournament in australia, Im not sold that this game can be played competitively. I think it will only shine in narrative settings. We tried the EA mission in game 1 of the event. It felt slightly better but it still had the meat grinder feeling and lack of room to maneuver. Game 2 was more narrative and had a better feel than having objectives and progressive scoring.
@@Tabletop_Standard we played 1500 points on a 6x4 using the EA tournament mission. It was better but it was more a case of what’s actually left after 3 turns to take objectives rather than how EA usually plays
@@aglumm9469 I think on account of higher lethality, missions would benefit from something forcing like 1/3 of both armies detachments into reserves. A steady stream of reserves coming in over turns 2-4 would help the game's pacing, limit overall activations on the board at any one time but also help games get to turn 5 in terms of feeling close, not have them all feel decided by turn 2-3.
Didn't you guys forget the shield bubble on t1? The IF Sicarans and Rhinos would have been protected from the fire from the Preds and Sicarans - their tacs would also have been protected a bit from the kratos point defenses i reckon.
@@Tabletop_Standard Possibly - it might also have been the 6" distance - they actually dealt with it later on in the video. I was probably expecting it to have more of an influence :)
I want to love this game but I think I prefer the old epic to it. I’ve played over a dozen games now and I’ve never seen a “come back from behind” victory. Generally you know who’s going to win by the end of turn two.
@@EAfirstlast We've made a house rule where overwatch can only be done on first fire or with weapons with point defense. It fixes the stupid planes overwatching interceptors nonsense.
So basically game better by he who stands last wins with game being car parks on 1st fire as going forward actively punished. Thanks but no. Multiple ways to win preferable to 1
End game isn't solution to that. Terrain and player skill is. My games have units left toward late. How? Simple. Plenty and varied terrain and i don't throw everything to front right away :) i only commit minimum needed to score each turn. Problem solved. Enemy can't kill what you don't allow. Throw all to the front and you lose all fast. Simples. End game just leads to static dice rolling game. No need to use miniatures. One side tables other just as fast as now and wins.
Some thoughts from Adepticon, 3 2k pt games, which was a well run event imo:
Composition:
* I find that mixed arms make the game more interesting. More infantry, melee and shooting both, Dreadnoughts, tarantulas. Deep strikes. I'm looking forward to mixing in jetbikes and other speedy things. Just tanks shooting at each other, there's not much to it. The most exciting thing can be a good or a bad roll.
* Planes and Titans don't add much spice either, they're effective but too rock-paper-scissorsy to be interesting; you either take them down with AA or overwhelming firepower, or don't interact with them all game and accept that you'll lose things every now and again.
Table:
* We played 2k games at 4x4" and they didn't feel as packed. There was less terrain all over. More than AT, but not this much.
* Also, craters and forests add spice that goes beyond just buildings; you can see through them, different things are differently able to move through etc. Infantry and tanks can
* I'm ok with the scoring system, but, I play infantry a lot, and my local meta does too. Infantry dies easy. Make sure there are no garrisonable buildings within each objective and things start to die and swing.
Yeah, the game is still ~decided after a few rounds, once a player starts edging towards tabled. But the rounds before that can be more exciting with a few changes to the table and army composition.
I agree that the game doesn't match AT in quality, but I think there's more enjoyement to be squeezed out of it than could be seen here. I hope this helps. I enjoyed the batrep anyway and I hope to see more. Cheers
I appreciate this comment. Thinking now no buildings next objectives really would help them be contestable
Will try that tomorrow. il
Rather than remove buildings, tech your list to be able to reliably demolish one or two civitas a turn. Your opponents will soon realise these things are death traps and would rather face the music outside of them. The game then becomes interesting late game as you will want to ensure you maintain this ability to avoid one or two stands entering a key building and becoming a problem.
i wish more people were making battlereports of this. more often. :( had to wait 2 weeks :(
Bearfoot minis, mini wargaming, play on and us.. Not sure who else is covering it?
32:28 I think part of the car parking comes from neither player having proper melee units (eg those with Rend) and partly from neither player Infiltrating.
It still happens, but not quite so much.
We play 2k on 6x4 and it spreads the game out a lot more. The objectives are not so close and you don’t car park as much. Also sometimes less scenery is better. We have also stopped using just buildings and started using woods, craters, etc much better experience.
Also make sure all buildings are more than 3” away from objectives 😅
Bigger table and more spread out objectives really helps a lot.
Agreed but we were playing from an event mission pack
@@Tabletop_Standard Absolutely. Hopefully they will adapt for next time with constructive feedback.
Knights solve the car park problem, they excell in melee vs tanks, being able to wipe out 4-5 in a single round.
Also a lack of melee options or enough infantry stands to outnumber the tanks 3:1, infantry are really only a threat to tanks in melee.
If any of the objectives had an overlap with a building, car parking tanks also becomes unfeasable, as it would be super ineffecient to outcap infantry with tanks
Still a valid problem with the system tho, but not something impossible for the player to elleviate with their list
The positioning of objectives and the way the scoring works means that you actually play on a much smaller table than 4*4. A couple of ideas that could improve this: (i) Deployment zones of 6 inches by 24 inches or right angle triangle of 18 inches by 18 inches in opposite corners and objectives span across the corner to corner diagonal lines of the table - this makes more use of the full table as the diagonal lines are longer than the vertical and horizontal. (ii) Objectives only score from turn 3 and escalate in value each turn - would make games last a little longer rather than throwing everything forwards in a suicide rush.
Great battle! And awesome setting on our Necropolis game mat 👍🔝
Very nice mat! Great work, guys
Great vid. Thx for the upload. Lf to your next one
Thank you. A comment like this goes a long way
With the Assault Marines there, they still roll Morale from Overwatch and if failed lose the Charge Order. The move is still completed and still become Engaged for later in the turn, but they lose the CAF bonuses.
Ultimately it was a dreadful plan 😂 as ASM only get a net +1 for it, and there were more than enough Missiles to deal with the building!
Cheers bud
That said, seems the Thunderhawk forgot the Point Defence Bolters?
I don't like these tournament style objectives in any of GW's games. It makes all games feel too similar. I think it just stands out more in Legions cause there's less factions. The game system feels more old school... I'm having way more fun with it playing oldschool scenarios or making up narratives.
Great match.
Thank you 🙂
I might have this wrong?, but I think you make a morale check if you lose close combat and only if the morale check is failed do you have to withdraw from the combat.
You are correct
Commenting on the carpark issue. In this case i can see the terrain amplifies the issue. All the walls and the small gaps in them makes the effective playing area 2*2.
If your an armageddon player i can understand the feeling of it being crampt. But me as an old epic player i dont have a problem with it, we used to play with a lot of stuff. :)
Incorporating a version of the old victory points for killing might also make it a bit mor fun. Like you get 1Vp for every full 100p. This and using the All Out War missions way for deploying objectives but with a normal deployment zone for deploying units might be fun and is probably how we will end up plying it normaly for gaming day, we will also be playing it on a 4*6.
I do think the idea of using epic armageddon missions might be neat
Worth a punt
That flyer base for the Thunderhawk could be a bit longer.
@@euphoria7046 🙄
i just came back from an LI tournament in australia, Im not sold that this game can be played competitively. I think it will only shine in narrative settings. We tried the EA mission in game 1 of the event. It felt slightly better but it still had the meat grinder feeling and lack of room to maneuver. Game 2 was more narrative and had a better feel than having objectives and progressive scoring.
How many points and what size tables?
@@Tabletop_Standard we played 1500 points on a 6x4 using the EA tournament mission. It was better but it was more a case of what’s actually left after 3 turns to take objectives rather than how EA usually plays
Cheers bud. Good to know. I'd like to try it myself. Maybe 1750/2000 points
@@aglumm9469 I think on account of higher lethality, missions would benefit from something forcing like 1/3 of both armies detachments into reserves. A steady stream of reserves coming in over turns 2-4 would help the game's pacing, limit overall activations on the board at any one time but also help games get to turn 5 in terms of feeling close, not have them all feel decided by turn 2-3.
The turn 2 to 3 finish seems to be the rule not the exception 👍🏻
Like and comment to support the channel as usual
When can we expect new pure Titanicus reports?)
Cheers always appreciated. Some time in the near future for AT.. I have a couple coming out for our Patrons then I plan to do one for YT
Will. Not. Start. A. New. System.
Youre not helping guys.
Awesome video.
Sorry, not sorry 😁
@@Tabletop_Standardhaha thanks. My poor impulse control is the issue...
Didn't you guys forget the shield bubble on t1? The IF Sicarans and Rhinos would have been protected from the fire from the Preds and Sicarans - their tacs would also have been protected a bit from the kratos point defenses i reckon.
Without watching it I can only imagine their save was no worse than a 5+ from the attacks?
@@Tabletop_Standard Possibly - it might also have been the 6" distance - they actually dealt with it later on in the video. I was probably expecting it to have more of an influence :)
@@OlivierHomps saved a Spartan. That was about it 🙂
Will the Strategic Anomaly cards become available at some point? Would love to try.
I think the max fire lads are making the pack public so best bet is hit them up
I want to love this game but I think I prefer the old epic to it.
I’ve played over a dozen games now and I’ve never seen a “come back from behind” victory. Generally you know who’s going to win by the end of turn two.
This appears to be the common theme
My second (and only 3k) game I game back from behind when I realized how silly plane overwatching was
@@EAfirstlast We've made a house rule where overwatch can only be done on first fire or with weapons with point defense. It fixes the stupid planes overwatching interceptors nonsense.
Where’s your terrain from? It looks amazing!
Thanks. All over the place. The walls and buildings are from gamerforge. There is a video on the channel somewhere
Where did you get the flight stands from?
Home made. There is a post about them on the channel community tab
Do you have a Discord link?
We do not. We have a chat server on our Patreon.
Charging rhinos is bad game feel. I'd suggest trying to avoid it
Sorry I don't follow?
Those and arvus's charging feel really weird.
Think of it more as close quarters combat not literal hand to hand
progressive scoring isn't good, end game scoring is much better tbh.
That's my gut instinct too.
So basically game better by he who stands last wins with game being car parks on 1st fire as going forward actively punished.
Thanks but no. Multiple ways to win preferable to 1
@@bakuchidancer I'd rather play a 5 turn game than 2 turn game
End game isn't solution to that. Terrain and player skill is. My games have units left toward late. How? Simple. Plenty and varied terrain and i don't throw everything to front right away :) i only commit minimum needed to score each turn. Problem solved.
Enemy can't kill what you don't allow.
Throw all to the front and you lose all fast. Simples.
End game just leads to static dice rolling game. No need to use miniatures. One side tables other just as fast as now and wins.