Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Future Wars => Topic started by: Daeothar on September 28, 2022, 10:07:19 AM
-
Yesterday I received my latest copy of Wargames Illustrated, and in it, I came across an add for Xenos Rampant, scheduled for a release in November.
This piqued my interest, because: sci-fi skirmish game, and searching for it, I found several threads on it here on LAF, but it's been awfully quiet so far; last thread about it was from July 2021!
I even remarked that I was very interested in one of them (and I am), but I would have expected some more traffic about it, so close to the release date ???
So; is there no general interest, or has it simply been flying under the radar?
-
I'd completely missed it until the same WI advert.
I am hopeful for it, but most of my stuff is individuals, with very little more than a section of a couple of things - Pig Iron troops, some Tau, that sort of stuff. If this is a W40k lite kind of game, then it's probably not for me :-[
I'll certainly be having a look at it, but it's not a "must buy" for me just now. The update to Tomorrow's War intrigued me a bit more, but I don't know how much those two rulesets will overlap.
-
I’ll probably get it for both Star Wars and 40k.
-
I’ll probably get it for both Star Wars and 40k.
That was my take on it as well ;)
-
Definitely interested in it, just waiting for it to come out whilst I occasionally 'add' to potential armies!
-
Yep!
Presently painting units for my …..
StarWars, Serenity, Expanse, possibly Aliens
….. mash-up.
-
already on pre-order ;)
Very interested in seeing how it is presented, especially vehicles and aliens or even alien vehicles lol
Glen
-
Just pre-ordered as well.
Because, you know; it's the only way to be sure... :D
-
Just pre-ordered as well.
Because, you know; it's the only way to be sure... :D
Lol
-
Strongly considering buying this. I had a good time with Dragon Rampant so if the mechanics are similar, I might want to add it to my repertoire. On the other hand I've really been quite satisfied (and more importantly so is my son) with Grimdark Future to the point where I'm considering using it for Star Wars (WOTC figs mostly) and WWW2 (K47).
I'm trying to buy less rulesets that never get played and I haven't even tried Galactic Heroes which I recently bought. Will probably wait and see what the reviews say, but it's definitely a contender and has the potential to be a nice one-step-up in complexity from Grimdark Future for my son.
-
I also preordered a copy for my Star Wars games
-
Just had a look at this on the latest Osprey newsletter, and noticed its £25, so twice the price of blue book rule sets. Any thoughts on what the extra page count will provide?
-
Just had a look at this on the latest Osprey newsletter, and noticed its £25, so twice the price of blue book rule sets. Any thoughts on what the extra page count will provide?
More grief from the missus when she finds your credit card bill?
-
I may have a sniff at this. I thought Beyond The Gates of Antares was going to be an alternative to 40K with 40K models but I never got beyond reading the rulebook.
-
I ran a game of the unofficial beta-test XR rules on the channel, to see if the Rampant rules could handle more modern warfare.
The half-baked rules that I used worked really well. They felt like a modern (as in, modetn setting) ruleset, with a nice ebb and flow. Shifting the game from melee focussed to shooter focussed was natural, and the few tweaks to make that transition were simple and evocative. And that was just the rough draft.
I'm really looking forward to getting my hands on the fully playtested and polished set.
https://youtu.be/gAm1M1OT5dQ
-
I would be interested, as I'm looking something to Kick-Start
my 15mm Sci-Fi. which would be squad based.
I would keep my much loved Galactic Heroes for 28mm skirmish.
-
Just had a look at this on the latest Osprey newsletter, and noticed its £25, so twice the price of blue book rule sets. Any thoughts on what the extra page count will provide?
Amazon is showing it as hardback and 192 pages long, so it's more like Scrappers than the blue books (Scrappers is 148 pages and £19.99).
I'm guessing background fluff, army lists and loads of pictures will bulk it out.
Despite focusing on small skirmish collecting, I do have a lot of unpainted plastic in the pile that would let me bring quite a few of my races up to platoon level. I also found a bunch more painted Pig Iron troopers this morning, so there's that.
Arghh - too many projects o_o
-
Arghh - too many projects o_o
You can NEVER have too many projects.
1) It gives me credible excuses for not completing anything.
2) My Butterfly mind is kept happy.
3) More shiney things can justifiably be purchased.
4) Going to shows is allowed.
:D :D :D
-
Something to use all of my vast Gates of Antares for.
-
I too am looking forward to this book. Lion Rampant 2e is fantastic and am looking forward to the next book in the series.
I've already got 1/72 post apoc minis I was thinking about gaming this with, but am seriously considering tracking down some Gates of Antares...
-
I have a few Algoryns, so I've just picked up the Army starter set from Warlord to bulk them out. It does, however, make me wish I hadn't gone for an orange and red colour scheme on the ones I painted, as the orange took several coats to cover :(
Warlord has dropped Battle for Antares, but most stuff still seems to be there if you search for it. Some of it is made to order, but, hey, the rules aren't out until late next month anyway, so there's no rush ;D
-
Thanks to youse guys, I just ordered a batch of the 15mm mid-tech heavy armor figs from Khurasan. As an elite infantry force, i can get away with just a dozen or so figures. That gives me a full force for less than twenty bucks. Should be a snap to paint, too.
Gonna be interesting to see how they play. With only three maneuver elements, it is going depend heavily on thr scenarios.
-
You can NEVER have too many projects.
1) It gives me credible excuses for not completing anything.
2) My Butterfly mind is kept happy.
3) More shiney things can justifiably be purchased.
4) Going to shows is allowed.
:D :D :D
Too right.
-
It’s really soon, isn’t it?
-
It’s really soon, isn’t it?
Yes, waiting to see what North Star will offer in the next newsletter - I think it is a Merc sprue.
-
I finished my Elite Infantry in heavy power armor.
Ready to rock these rules and Christmas is coming early!
(http://jonmollison.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/IMG_20221018_123624343.jpg)
(http://jonmollison.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/IMG_20221018_123650151.jpg)
-
Cool stuff! 8)
What make are these?
-
There was a demo/beta version out before right?
Can anyone who has played it, let me know how it compares to One Page Rules Grimdark Future? I love Dragon Rampant so I'd be a prime target for Xenos, but I'm enjoying the heck out of Grimdark Future and it'd have to be pretty good to lure me away.
-
Yes, waiting to see what North Star will offer in the next newsletter - I think it is a Merc sprue.
Check the latest North Star newsletter. There's a £5 off if you spend £25 Halloween voucher. The book and a Stargrave Troopers sprue are currently £22, so all you need to do is find something for £3 or more to qualify.
-
Check the latest North Star newsletter. There's a £5 off if you spend £25 Halloween voucher. The book and a Stargrave Troopers sprue are currently £22, so all you need to do is find something for £3 or more to qualify.
There are also army packs (Rebels, Imperial and Cultist) using the StarGrave sprues and figures (interesting use of Ghost Archipelago sailors - a good source of ruffians).
-
Cool stuff! 8)
What make are these?
Khurasan. These are the mid-tech power suited guys. They also make a generic trooper with a shoulder mounted Auto cannon.
-
Hi,
I’m really interested in getting these rules. My gaming area at home is 4x3 foot. Do we know if that will be enough space to play a proper game with rules as is, or would I need to alter the suggested ranges?
Thanks if anyone has any info.
Jonny
-
It's a skirmish game. Usually they're geared towards 4x4 or 3x3 areas. But there are those that only take up 2x2!
So even though I have nothing to base this on, I think it's safe to assume that 4x3 will be plenty of room...
-
Hi,
I’m really interested in getting these rules. My gaming area at home is 4x3 foot. Do we know if that will be enough space to play a proper game with rules as is, or would I need to alter the suggested ranges?
Most long range missile fire has a maximum range of 18 in. The fastest unit type has a movement rate of 12 in.
If you are using 1-in diameter bases then a unit in loose order will cover somewhere around 4 in by 6 in of space.
That means it will take most units 8 full turns to cross the length of your table in six to cross the width.
You might want to cut down on the size of the deployment zones. By requiring units to stand on the table edge at the start of the game, rather than 6 inches out, you can effectively make your table larger.
I think it will work fine. Ultimately, it's a matter of taste. And you'll have to decide for yourself. For my part, I use a table that is 32 inches wide, and 24 in deep. With 15 mm figures I cut all ranges and movement in half. And it works great.
-
Most long range missile fire has a maximum range of 18 in. The fastest unit type has a movement rate of 12 in.
If you are using 1-in diameter bases then a unit in loose order will cover somewhere around 4 in by 6 in of space.
That means it will take most units 8 full turns to cross the length of your table in six to cross the width.
You might want to cut down on the size of the deployment zones. By requiring units to stand on the table edge at the start of the game, rather than 6 inches out, you can effectively make your table larger.
I think it will work fine. Ultimately, it's a matter of taste. And you'll have to decide for yourself. For my part, I use a table that is 32 inches wide, and 24 in deep. With 15 mm figures I cut all ranges and movement in half. And it works great.
Oh dear. I was hoping these would be my go to Sci -Fi game but those ranges really put me off. 18" weapon range? We're back into WH40K territory. Sci Fi weapons that can't shoot more than a nominal 100 feet?
-
18” range? Really?
I’ve been playing a bunch of sharp practice lately (Napoleonic Skirmish) and muskets fire to 24” and rifles out to 36”
-
The Rampant rules are so flexible surely it’s just a matter of house-ruling to suit?
-
Yeah, just double the ranges :)
-
Never played sci-fi before, just ordered Xenos Rampant because I enjoy playing Lion Rampant.
I like the Copplestone Future Wars range so hopefully these will work.
https://www.copplestonecastings.co.uk/list.php?cat=1&sub=32&page=1
-
Is Xenos Rampant a "Small Skirmish" game? I thought it was going to be more along the size of Lion and Dragon Rampant.
-
If you go with full model count units (12 or 6 figs per unit in Dragon Rampant, so probably similar here…) a force will normally be about 50 figures.
BUT, you could also use ‘reduced model’ units, where each figure can take several hits before being removed, and a unit might have only 3-4 figures (or just one figure for real heroes or big critters). The model count for a force then could be as low as 5-6 figures (all single figure units). You could actually have both formats in the same game- think Star Wars scenes where a small number of heroes (4-5 single model units) takes on a company of Imperial stormtroopers (40-50 figures in full count units).
I am looking forward to seeing the rules and giving them a spin. I had a lot of fun with DR, and expect this will be similar.
-
Hi,
Thanks to everyone who replied to my question. Sounds like there should be some easy workarounds for a smaller table.
Jonny
-
The Rampant rules are so flexible surely it’s just a matter of house-ruling to suit?
Doesn't really work though if the game is tested/designed with 18" shooting and you extend it to the whole table (which would be more suitable given the scale of the game). It sounds like the same Bolt Action/WH40K nonsense where the figure scale and purported game scale simply don't match. ie the worst kind of bath tubbing. If I wanted to design my own Rampant engine sci-fi game I would have (actually I did because I wanted to use my 40K figures in a better game but it would have been nice to have something official to use rather than persuade my mates to use my homebrew ones)
I know the medieval and fantasy version will have similar dissonance between figure scale and range but somehow it just doesn't feel so jarring compared to what is a sci-fi platoon scale game. Perhaps that is because it is easier to say "these 12 guys actually represent a regiment" in medievals but not "these 10 guys represent a company, but one of them is armed with a plasma gun and they won't operate like a modern company would but just bunch up in one amorphous blob"
-
Personally, I don’t expect I’d have a problem doubling distances or whatever, which would be more than enough for me as an effective range. Support Weapons doubled-up from 24” to 48” would definitely dominate the tabletop for games where that might be wanted. But heck, I haven’t seen the book yet (I only have Richard Cowan’s original fan-variant as a guide) and I expect I’d just play as written. :)
-
Range of shooting especially with Sci-fi is always an issue. 40k is notorious for that - but Bolt Action and many others are just as bad. Realistically, if using real figure scale for distance the tables are way too small for more than a few figs skirmishing. I always smile at those rules when a laser pistol can't shoot the length of a tank... It's a pure game mechanic and just a factor of life with some rules.
P.S. Thats why I plan on using 6mm figs for this game. The range scales at least should be reasonable visually with the rules as written. I'll likely use single bases with markers vs fig removal for hits but otherwise it should work fine.
-
18” range? Really?
I’ve been playing a bunch of sharp practice lately (Napoleonic Skirmish) and muskets fire to 24” and rifles out to 36”
Hmm, for a game of the size Xenos seems to be going for, that does seem a bit short.
-
Hmm, for a game of the size Xenos seems to be going for, that does seem a bit short.
It's especially odd because there are 24" and 36" ranges in The Men Who Would be Kings.
-
Hmm, for a game of the size Xenos seems to be going for, that does seem a bit short.
That is the standard. You can purchase upgrades to extend ranges for certain units. For example, snipers can shoot 24 in. It does have rules for spotters, and artillery that can shoot up to 48 in.
-
That is the standard. You can purchase upgrades to extend ranges for certain units. For example, snipers can shoot 24 in. It does have rules for spotters, and artillery that can shoot up to 48 in.
Hmm. Not making me want the rules more. Not to say that I won't be convinced and pick them up later, but as I acquire rules that I quite enjoy it becomes harder to lure me into new games if I know up front there are red flags.
Perhaps I missed it, but has there been mention of a recommended table size?
-
Again, I'm going solely by an unofficial beta test PDF and the rest of the rules in the Rampant family. They generally call for a standard 6 ft by 4 ft table.
I use a table half that size and cut all ranges and movement in half, primarily because that's the space I have, but also because I play the game in 15 mm.
-
Again, I'm going solely by an unofficial beta test PDF and the rest of the rules in the Rampant family. They generally call for a standard 6 ft by 4 ft table.
That size table does seem an odd pairing with 18" standard ranges.
-
Interesting this rule set coming out when it is.
I just used Lion Rampart with modifications to play Star Wars.
It worked well.
It does change to more of a shooter game.
Not much hand to hand fighting.
With more terrain and objectives to capture would increase the hand to hand.
-
Interesting this rule set coming out when it is.
I just used Lion Rampart with modifications to play Star Wars.
It worked well.
I actually converted Dragon Rampant to play Judge Dredd. Had a roster for the Justice Dept, various Juves, an Ape gang and some renegade robots.
Hopefully won't need to much rework for Xenos Rampant.
-
I have been quite excited about this but I am not quite sure about it. We have skirmish “crew” games in the shape of Stargrave and Rogue Stars. So we are talking about a larger skirmish, which I hope gives us some vehicles but not (and it clearly isn’t) an armoured clash.
As above, I am want to use it for 15mm. I am really not sure about it in 25/28mm. In 15mm you could argue that the 18 inches represents effective shooting range (although I would still want to consider doubling it). I very much feel that this falls into Fistful of Lead territory, so why do I want this? I am hoping that it will give me a smoother sci-fi experience than Tomorrows War did and feel a bit more military perhaps than FFOL (which I do like very, very much).
Am I hoping for too much?
-
Based on my Dragon Rampant experience, I regularly fought battles with 60+ figures a side. Does that count as large skirmish? However, those battles had nicely lined up units of 12 figures, so I'd be interested in how Xenos Rampant organises its units for the table.
-
Based on my Dragon Rampant experience, I regularly fought battles with 60+ figures a side. Does that count as large skirmish? However, those battles had nicely lined up units of 12 figures, so I'd be interested in how Xenos Rampant organises its units for the table.
60+, I guess it does. That transition from unit “lines” will be very interesting.
-
I'm very curious to see how the use of indirect fire and spotters changes the game. Also, whether off-board artillery barrages will be an option. Those will really help solidify the game as a modern/future ruleset with different fundamental assumptions than the previous Rampant titles.
-
The pre-release review copies are out, and the first "review" of XR is live. From the looks of things, they have changed activation and free actions. Now, a unit has to succeed with a normal (move/attack/shoot) action first, and then can follow up with their free action.
That would mean assault troops with "shoot" as a free action can, if they succeed on a move activation, can move into position and open fire on the enemy in the same go. Or a speedy unit with a free Move activation that succeeds on its initial activation roll could move twice in the same turn. That might make for some pretty speedy units indeed.
Also, every unit can "shoot back" when fired on, but they have to succeed at a 7+ "return fire" activation to do so. Similar to the charge and counter-charge system already in use from the looks of it.
-
My copy is in the post, so looking forward to playing it.
-
I'm on a rare foray to LAF and have just seen this thread. Please note that the discussions about range and free actions discussed above are not accurate. Maybe that's unsurprising as the book hasn't published yet!
Range extends beyond those distances quoted here - see the extreme range rule on page 61/62.
And the description of Free Actions is also not correct. A Free action means that you don't need to dice to carry it out. You don't get a second action. See page 54.
Regarding table size, we leave this open to accommodate all comers but suggest at least 48” x 48”. Different table sizes produce games that play out very differently to one another, the same as many rules. See pages 8 and 59.
For those of you who haven't dismissed the rulebook based on what you've read above (!), I hope you enjoy it.
-
Thank you for the update, hoss. I'm really looking forward to getting my hands on a copy and setting the record straight myself.
-
Thank you Dan :)
-
Wild speculation, incorrect information and knee-jerk reactions? On the internet? Surely not!
-
Wild speculation, incorrect information and knee-jerk reactions? On the internet? Surely not!
lol lol lol
-
Any industrious hobbyist plan on making a unit card generator for Xeno Rampant? ;)
-
More details from the author here:
https://ospreypublishing.com/uk/osprey-blog/2022/xenos-rampant-design-diary/
-
Looking good!
Dare I hope these are the rules that I have been looking and waiting for? ;) :o lol
-
Really impressed with my first read through, not least because I can use it for my WW1 games! :)
-
Really impressed with my first read through, not least because I can use it for my WW1 games! :)
That’s very interesting as, my SciFi project aside, I’d been wondering whether they would work for my long-stalled Airlanding (1942 Sicily) project. 8)
-
That’s very interesting as, my SciFi project aside, I’d been wondering whether they would work for my long-stalled Airlanding (1942 Sicily) project. 8)
I don’t see why not. There are WW2 lists at the back as well as WW1 although the former are a bit weird War.
-
Thanks for the link to the game design write up. I had already ordered the game (long-standing fan of Lion Rampant and Dragon Rampant), but the write up gave me a better idea what the changes will look like. It seems like a thoughtful re-purposing of the game engine, rather than just a re-skin - the description of it as the ‘grandson of LR’ seems about right. I’m very much looking forward to getting my copy, I think it will help put some old lead on the table again!
-
I, too, would like to thank you for posting the link to the game’s write up on the Osprey site. That was very helpful. I will be ordering my copy shortly.
-
I don’t see why not. There are WW2 lists at the back as well as WW1 although the former are a bit weird War.
Thanks 8)
-
It is interesting, now building some army lists.
-
My copy arrived today, and I still haven't had time to have a look :'(
Looking forward.
-
My copy arrived this weekend, and it's a great read.
So much potential, and the scenarios look like fun. Also, the sheer amount of example forces is really useful to determine where one's own force should sit, skill and points-wise.
Great book, and I can't wait to play some test games! 8)
-
My copy arrived this weekend, and it's a great read.
So much potential, and the scenarios look like fun. Also, the sheer amount of example forces is really useful to determine where one's own force should sit, skill and points-wise.
Great book, and I can't wait to play some test games! 8)
Agreed :D
I need to stat some stuff up and give it a go lol
-
I got hold of the book the other day and had a skim through then and a more detailed read-through today with a view to playing tomorrow. Looks like a great iteration of the Rampant rules, and I think the tweaks made since the blog version are real improvements.
A few years ago (2019, maybe?), some friends and I played a big four-player game of the blog version, and I made the fatal mistake of statting up one side as a pure Dragon Rampant army (so no free actions): cue that player failing three starting activations in a row! (I should add that that's the only occasion when I've been irked by the Rampant turnover system, which I really like in general.) But the published rules cover all the troop types necessary, so the old "mix in some Dragon Rampant units" principle no longer applies (and everyone apart from Militia Rabble gets free activations).
The shift from sixes and twelves to fives, tens and fifteens looks really good (especially as the DR-style strength points mean that you aren't in any way confined to those numbers on the tabletop). I like the way that the primitive units can become quite a fearsome melee prospect if you bulk up their manpower - or simply use strength points to make them more formidable.
That flexibility is really nice touch. Initially, I was disappointed that there was no option to remove missile weapons from Berserk Infantry to create a purely close-combat unit like Bellicose Foot in Dragon Rampant. But then I realised that you could add Mob and Savages to a Primitive Infantry unit to get an even more ferocious melee unit (Attack Value of 3+ rather than Berserk Infantry's 4+ - so just as hard-hitting as Bellicose Foot). And while Mob increases strength points to 15, you can still use whatever figure count you prefer, from 1 up.
Overall, the game has even more room for customising units than its brethren do. Most troop types have a much bigger range of options than in Lion/Dragon, and there are still the special rules to layer over the top. So there's a great "toolbox" feel to the book.
And the unlimited range for most weapons (with reduced effectiveness) is great. Some units can shoot right across the table without any reduction in effectiveness, so it's a far cry from the 40K trope of troops being unable to shoot the length of a tank! But standard infantry units will still pose a threat to the lightly armoured from the other side of the table, so cover will be at a premium.
The Firefight reaction rules looks as if it will give the game a rather different flavour from the other Rampant rules, and it should introduce a new tactical element (risk ending your turn to shoot first with a disposable unit for the reward of one-way fire with your best shooters thereafter; units being shot at can only fire back at the first unit to target them in a turn).
Tomorrow, we're aiming for a four-player game with a rag-tag bunch of primitives, mercenaries and one great big walker (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1C_7VoQATxw) against two detachments of space marines. I shall report back ...
-
That sounds very promising. My copy has arrived, but is in limbo under the Christmas tree for 3 weeks because it’s a present. I’ll have lots to think about and anticipate, though!
-
My copy has arrived, but is in limbo under the Christmas tree for 3 weeks because it’s a present.
Mine is similarly embargoed so I’m absorbing as much as possible from threads like this and busily painting minis. :D
-
Good write-up Hobgoblin - feels that from this and the various game reports most of the pre-release concerns have proved to be nothing more than rumour. Which is good news.
I’m hoping Santa brings me a copy too!
-
Well, we played our first game and very much enjoyed it!
Our regular opponents couldn't make it, so we played a two-player game rather than a four-player one: two Elite Infantry units with Heavy Weapons and a Walker Fighting Vehicle against two units of Heavy Infantry with Heavy Weapons and Assault Doctrine, two units of Primitive Infantry with Mob, a unit of Berserk Infantry and a Slow unit of Support Infantry.
I realise now that the second side was two points short at just 22; they could have had an extra unit of bog-standard Heavy or Berserk Infantry. I'd originally intended to give the Primitives the Infiltrator rule in the four-player game and had forgotten about it when I rejigged the sides for two.
The result was a total victory for the Elites and Walker, who wiped out all of the enemy units. But it was still a close-run thing. Both units of Elite Infantry had taken a casualty or two, and the Walker was down to half strength. I think we forgot the Firefight rule a couple of times, to the detriment of the Heavy Infantry. Also, a brainfart at one point had me thinking that there was no point having the Heavy Infantry shoot at extreme range (they need sixes to hit, and I was forgetting that the modifier applies to Armour, not Shoot Value). So the game would have been closer, I think, had we been more familiar with the rules (and if I'd had the missing points!).
One thing that became clear very quickly is that Elite Infantry (space marines, etc.) are much more formidable relative to other troop types than their counterparts in the other Rampant games. This is plainly by design: Elite Infantry in Xenos Rampant cost three times as much as Heavy Infantry, rather than one and a half times as in Dragon Rampant.
There are a couple of factors in this. First, Elite Infantry shoot much better than regulars: 50% hits under normal conditions rather than 17% (and remember, they can fire back when shot at!). At extreme range, Elite Infantry will typically cause a casualty whereas Heavy, Light and Recon Infantry won't.
Second, the reduction in the dice pool from 12 to 10 means that Elite Infantry are much less vulnerable to hard hitters in melee combat than Elite Foot in Dragon Rampant. You can soup up a unit of Primitive or Berserk Infantry to 3+ in melee by boosting their numbers. In Dragon Rampant, that typically means two kills when charging Elite Foot with Armour 4. In Xenos Rampant, it'll typically just be one kill (six or seven hits rather than the eight you'd expect on 12 dice). So a big mob of charging savages has to get quite lucky to be able to cause more than one casualty - and, unless they're upgraded with mono-molecular blades, they stand no chance of reducing an Elite Infantry unit to half strength (something far from unheard of when a Bellicose Foot unit charges an Elite Foot unit in Dragon Rampant - you just need 12 dice with no 1s or 2s).
All this will delight space-marine players! Our regular opponents were going to bring three upgradedsquads each of Elite Infantry, so we'll have to think carefully about how to combat those for next time. Support Infantry are the obvious rock to Elite Infantry's scissors, as they match them for firepower with longer range and can be easily upgraded to be more damaging still. But they are the proverbial eggshells armed with hammers.
What's clear, I think, is that regular troops can't really compete with Elite Infantry without upgrades. If you were facing four squads of plain-vanilla Elite Infantry with twelve squads of plain-vanilla Heavy Infantry, you'd almost certainly lose - at least in the straight-fight scenarios - because most shooting attacks won't cause any damage (they will cause Courage Tests, though, which mitigates things slightly).
That's almost certainly a feature, not a bug, of course. But it's worth noting that standard non-Elite units can't stand up to their Elite foes as they can in the other Rampant games - and, again, the points values reflect that (you can get six vanilla Light Infantry units for a single squad of Elite Infantry against a 2:1 ratio in LR and DR). Once you start tooling up Heavy and Light Infantry with Armour Piercing and Heavy Weapons, they become much more of a threat. Indeed, Light Infantry with those upgrades (and perhaps Increased Squad Size) look quite a good deal. And I should note, too, that the sample army lists have hardly any un-upgraded units in them; clearly, you're meant to splash out on specialist gear!
The one area in our game where the limits of the engine perhaps showed themselves were when the Support Infantry unit (a field gun) was reduced to half strength. With all of its crew, the weapon had been fairly successful at damaging the walker (Fighting Vehicle). At half strength, it no longer could (a maximum of five hits against Armour 6). It could cause Courage Tests, but the maximum effect would be a Suppressed result rather than a Rout.
That felt a little off; the weapon that had crippled the vehicle was still able to shoot it but unable to harm it at all. It would have been more cinematic and exciting for it still to have had an outside chance of dealing a killer blow to the walker. Had I given the Support Infantry unit Armour Piercing, it would still have been in the game, so I suppose that's the solution. But I noted that in the earlier 6/12 version of the game, the gun would still have been viable, though much less likely to cause damage - and that outside chance of all six dice coming up with 4, 5 or 6 would have been the sort of prospect that makes games gripping towards the end.
My other slight quibble might be with the suggested game duration (after 6 turns, you roll to see if you get more). I'm not sure that works as well here as it does in (say) Kings of War, where activations are guaranteed. Despite the free moves, turns can end very quickly in XR; I recall thinking that we were about 10 turns in by the time the game reached its natural climax. If we'd ended after seven, I think the experience would have been less enjoyable. Anyway, we'll try out the timing rules properly next time and see how it goes.
All in all, I'm looking forward to another game this week - and testing out some of the other troop types (as well as remembering the Firefight rule at all time). I'm also keen to try out some of the other scenarios (we played the first one: a straight-up fight).
-
(As an aside, it occurs to me that this thread is in the wrong forum - Xenos Rampant is a large skirmish game!)
-
Great feedback HG, thank you
-
Thanks for the info; very useful to know before playing a first game. 8)
As it is, I'm largely unfamiliar with the Rampant series, so this'll be a completely new experience for me. Still; it sounds like a very good set of rules...
-
Hopefully I'm asking this on the right thread now! ;)
I got my copy at the weekend. Had a quick browse, but I'm struggling to see how you would incorporate 'Force Powers' for a Star Wars themed game. Is there place where we can share our army lists (please don't say Facebook)?
-
I haven’t read my copy yet (is a gift under the Christmas tree), but the general tendency in Dragon Rampant (and I expect Xenos follows this) is to look at powers/capabilities in terms of overall effect, rather than specific special rules. If that is true, then incorporating Force power (or psionics or magic) is just a matter of figuring out what the power does (Sith choking out folks without touching them could be a better hand to hand score, or Force-assisted leaps become movement bonuses), and translate that into existing profile upgrades…. With the use of single-model units, Darth Vader gets statted up as a single- model elite infantry unit with some additional upgrades. From what I have read about elite units in Xenos, that should about cover it!
-
For Darth Vader, how about Elite Infantry (6) + Unarmed (-1) + Mono-Molecular Blades (+2) + Alpha-Class Psychic (+4, Visions of Terror, Paralysis, Psychic Shield) + High-Powered Blades (+1)? That gives you a maxed-out 12-point single-model unit. You could swap High-Powered Blades for Brutal Leader (or reduce him to a Beta-Class Psychic and ditch Psychic Shield).
-
Another couple of reflections on that first game: first, it has quite a different feel to the other Rampant games because units are so vulnerable out in the open. The average shooting attack from an Elite Infantry or Support Infantry unit will destroy a normal-sized Primitive Infantry unit, so cover is at a premium. I thought that was a great feature - it was genre-appropriate and created real tension throughout.
Second, that feeling of vulnerability makes mobility very important. I can see the cavalry upgrade (Mobile) being highly attractive. The 8" of our unarmoured primitives seemed a little inadequate with all those Elite Infantry about! The Go To Ground trait is useful here, of course - but if you're trying to get to real cover, it can be a waste of a move action. Decisions, decisions ...
One thing we didn't try out were the Xenomorph profiles. It'll be interesting to see how those work out; they're essentially Greater and Lesser Warbeasts from Dragon Rampant, but the 5/10 dice pools mean that they won't hit as hard. As with some of the infantry units, it may be that upgrades are essential to give them a real close-combat kick.
It's true that the downgrades to close-combat ability are balanced by the smaller unit sizes. But you still need to knock three Strength Points off a five-strong unit to get it down to five dice, so the maths doesn't favour the close-combat specialists. Mind you, if you take High-Powered Blades and Swarm for Lesser Xenomorphs, the maths tips the other way, and you could take even an Elite unit down to half-strength in one attack (with the blessings of the dice gods!).
-
That's good to hear, as I'm dying to take my CC-only alien bug swarm to the table.
I've had visions of a virtual carpet of chitin surging, bounding and leaping across the table. Dying in droves, but eventually getting to grips with their squishy opponents.
And eating all of them... :D
-
Well, you should be able to get a good 60 of them onto the table for 24 points ...
-
Had a game of this at our club on Tuesday, my first introduction to any Rampant game, and I enjoyed it. Normally not a fan of anything with more than 10-20 to a side, but this seemed to really flow and felt "clean".
Got to admit I didn't get my head around the wounding mechanic (not helped as I haven't read the rules and we didn't have a lot of spare time), so had to rely on my (trustworthy) opponent, but definitely a game I want to try again, and will probably pick up the rules for.
-
That's good to hear, as I'm dying to take my CC-only alien bug swarm to the table.
I've had visions of a virtual carpet of chitin surging, bounding and leaping across the table. Dying in droves, but eventually getting to grips with their squishy opponents.
And eating all of them... :D
So funny. And so unlikely to succeed…
-
The wounding mechanic's dead simple - you just need a number of hits equal to the target unit's Armour stat to score a kill. Hits are scored by equaling or exceeding the attackers' Attack Value or Shoot Value.
So if you shoot at an Elite Infantry unit with Armour 4, you need four hits to deduct a Strength Point (i.e. a figure in a normal unit). If you rolled seven hits, you'd still only cause one casualty (or wound), but if you got eight, you'd cause two.
Units with more than half of their starting Strength Points roll 10 dice when they attack; those reduced to half or below roll five dice. In the other Rampant games, it's 12/6 rather than 10/5.
That makes Armour one of the most important stats in the game - weak units with Armour 1 could be wiped out with a single volley whereas the toughies with Armour 4 or even 5 can soak up a lot of punishment.
Xenos Rampant has lots of nice ways of tweaking the set-up with special rules (e.g. a unit with a Heavy Weapon counts a roll of 6 as two hits rather than one; other rules reduce the target's Armour score; and Undead round up hits rather than rounding down like everyone else).
But it's a very robust system and one of the strengths of the Rampant engine. It accomplishes in one batch of rolls what Kings of War does in two and Warhammer in four (or sometimes more!) - taking into account both the skill of the attackers and the robustness of the defenders. I think it's one of the factors that gives the game that 'clean' feeling you describe - that and the way that combats are resolved in a self-contained way.
-
One thing to consider is that the high armor units, like Elite infantry and vehicles, are limited to five strength points maximum. That means at most you only need to wound them three times to knock them down to half strength, at which point they roll one die for morale checks. They might hang around like that longer than other units (wound penalties to morale checks do not carry over into later turns) but there is an upside. At that point the prospect of forcing them to retreat via a hit that doesn't cause a wound becomes much more achievable. The system contains a remarkable number of self-limiting factors like this.
-
I don't think it was a complicated system, it was just we were in a bit of a hurry (I unfortunately had to leave for work), so my opponent was just trying to explain it all quite quickly - he'd prepared QRS and pre-made forces.
I'm sure once I've read the rules it will become clear - my opponent, who's rules they were, by the 2nd round could just glance at the dice and work it out in seconds, and it was hid first game too.
Will definitely be picking up the book, but will probably be post-New Year, especially as many places seem sold out atm.
Skirmish is my go-to gaming, really don't like big battles, so expect to play this alongside Stargrave, especially if I want to put a few more figs on the board than in SG.
-
One thing to consider is that the high armor units, like Elite infantry and vehicles, are limited to five strength points maximum. That means at most you only need to wound them three times to knock them down to half strength, at which point they roll one die for morale checks. They might hang around like that longer than other units (wound penalties to morale checks do not carry over into later turns) but there is an upside. At that point the prospect of forcing them to retreat via a hit that doesn't cause a wound becomes much more achievable. The system contains a remarkable number of self-limiting factors like this.
That's a very good point, though I'm not sure about how well balanced it proves in practice. We played another game the other weekend, pitting two 24-point detachments of space marines (so all Elite Infantry) against a detachment consisting of Heavy, Berserk and Support Infantry and another consisting of a Fighting Vehicle and Heavy and Elite Infantry.
All four detachments ended up having three units each. The marines had a mix of armour piercing, extra-heavy armour and anti-tank weapons; the Berserk/Heavy/Support side had 10 strength points for the first two units, heavy weapons, assault doctrine and armour piercing for the Heavy Infantry and artillery, armour piercing and heavy weapons for the support infantry. The vehicle was a walker with armour piercing and artillery; the heavies and elites had heavy weapons and armour piercing.
We enjoyed the game, but it did end up rather one-sided; I think one of the six marine units was destroyed and two brought down to half strength before they wiped all their enemies out. And so I was left wondering if Elite Infantry are a little undercosted - especially as the Firefight rule works to their advantage (most units are unlikely to do them much harm in an exchange of fire whereas they'll typically cause at least one casualty every time and more against the lightly armoured troop types).
What we found was that non-Elite units had to be heavily souped up (with armour piercing, increased squad size and heavy weapons especially) to have any real chance of causing the Elites harm. But those upgrades took them to or above the Elite point cost and still left them significantly inferior. The Fighting Vehicle was the notable exception to this, but otherwise, the net result was that the Elites were up against the same number of markedly weaker units.
Early in the game, the Support Infantry unit targeted one unit of Elite Infantry from across the table (the Support Infantry had the artillery rule to boost its range to 48"). They caused a couple of casualties, but the Elite Infantry immediately took the Support Infantry to half-strength through Firefight and then finished them off in their own turn (taking a casualty from Firefight in the process, perhaps). The extra point of Armour for extreme range was no match for a strong set of rolls - especially as it as negated by the Elite Infantry's armour piercing.
The 10-strong Berserk Infantry were destroyed by another group of Elites in a single round (albeit through an unlucky dice roll, but despite using cover as they advanced). The 10-strong Heavy Infantry lasted a little longer, but were down to half strength pretty quickly and soon destroyed after that. In the end, the only units on that side with any real durability were the Fighting Vehicle and the solitary group of Elite Infantry.
A few things occurred to me. First, to have evened up the game, we'd have needed much more cover. We had something like a dozen buildings arranged in a rough shanty town plus a spot of jungle on the fringe, but we'd have needed much, much more for the non-Elite side to have had much of a chance.
Second, and perhaps because of the relatively scanty cover, we had a lot of situations where "shoot and hope for a miracle with the dice" seemed the only smart option (moving out of the line of fire would just have allowed the Elites to get closer, where they would be even more deadly).
Third, the balance feels different from the other Rampant games. In Dragon Rampant, if you add shiny armour to a Bellicose Foot unit (for example), you bring it up to the cost of an Elite Foot unit, but the two units feel of equal value (the Bellicose Foot are faster and have more strength points. They're much worse at defending, but they can counter-charge. So it's not clear which is the best bet for your six points). Similarly, three Heavy Foot units seem equal in value to two Elite Foot (three tough units that have a lot of strength points and can close ranks for maximum defensiveness versus two smaller, more aggressive and versatile units).
In Xenos Rampant, however, you don't seem to get the same 'value for points' relative to Elites. On the basis of the games we've played, it's a no-brainer to take four Elite Infantry units over 12 lots of Heavy Infantry; in a straight fight, the former will wipe out the latter at their ease: they'll typically each have two shooting attacks per turn (one in their own and one through Firefight) and will usually cause a casualty with each attack. Importantly, they only need a little bit of luck to cause two casualties per attack (rolling six 4+s out of 10 rather than five), and will typically cause a casualty even to a Heavy Infantry unit at extreme range or in hard cover (five hits out of 10 dice versus Armour 4 or 5).
By contrast, the plain-vanilla Heavy Infantry will typically cause no casualties to the Elites (the HI need four sixes out of 10 or five at extreme range). They will cause Courage Tests, but the Elites only need 3 or better on two dice to pass when at full strength. So even when you have three HI units gunning for a single Elite unit, you need a fair bit of luck to do much damage before they cause mayhem. And if the Elites get lucky, they can potentially take a HI unit down to half strength in a single volley (i.e. 9 out of 10 dice coming in at 4+ - unlikely, but certainly not unusual in Rampant games - and certainly more likely than the 8 sixes out of 10 that the HI need to cause two casualties!).
If the sides did nothing but shoot at each other in a six-turn game, you'd expect each unit of Elite Infantry to cause something like 10 or 11 casualties (they'll typically cause five hits a turn regardless of range and will Firefight in several turns). My maths isn't good enough to calculate the casualties the Heavy Infantry would typically cause, but it could well be zero (if the two sides stayed at long range, the HI would need half their 10 dice to be sixes to cause a single casualty).
And if you upgrade the Heavy Infantry to the same points cost as the Elite Infantry (say, with heavy weapon and increased squad size), you'll probably cause a casualty each turn at close range (though it will be swingy - sixes double for the heavy weapon, which is a nice rule in itself), though not at extreme range, but you'll still move more slowly and be more vulnerable to courage tests and suppression. It'll take 15 hits to bring you down to half-strength, but an Elite unit will typically inflict that in a couple of turns (accounting for Firefight).
Fourth, the switch from 12/6 to 10/5 with regard to dice and strength points may have had an asymmetric effect on the weaker unit types. The chances of causing casualties have gone down significantly (on 12 dice, you'd expect HI to score a couple of hits a round when shooting; on 10, they need a little bit of luck), and my (decidedly unmathematical!) sense is that this isn't quite offset by the lower number of casualties required to take a unit to half-strength. If you typically won't cause any casualties with an attack, there's not much of a gulf between two and three.
Now, all this has to be caveated with the point that sides won't typically just shoot at each other all game. We've only played the 'straight fight' scenario, and the others may well reveal nuances that we've missed. Objectives might change everything (if you're moving, you aren't shooting, vehicles aside). And the six-turn limit might work against Elite Infantry here. But my sense from the first couple of games is that Elite Infantry might be a bit cheap at the price, and that increasing them to 8 points might be an improvement - not least because any upgrades would then take you down to two units of Elites at most, forcing some variety into the side. At the moment, a player can get three souped-up Elite units for 24AP (say, taking heavy weapons for one, armour piercing and high-powered blades for another, and super-heavy armour for the third) or four basic ones. If they were eight points a piece to begin with, you might end up with two upgraded Elite units and a few units of the other infantry classes (whose basic points value is 1 or 2). It's a consideration because an awful lot of players will have plenty of Elite Infantry ready to go!
Anyway, these are just initial impressions from a couple of games. I'd love to hear if other people's experience is different - and I'll report back on how it goes for us next time around, when we'll be playing one of the more elaborate scenarios.
-
Interesting and useful, thanks
-
The other tweak that occurred to me (along with upping the cost of Elite Infantry to 8) was improving the shooting of a basic Heavy Infantry unit to 5+ - which would then rise to 4+ (equal terms with Elites) if the unit were upgraded to 10-strong. That would mean that the upgraded HI infantry could exchange fire with the EI on more equal terms (though still with inferior armour) and would have more strength points, but would be slower, less potent in melee and more vulnerable to suppression and routing. That would give a reasonable 4:6 points ratio - the same as HF to EF in Dragon Rampant.
Again, though, this is just based on a couple of basic games.
-
Thanks for that analysis Hobgoblin, that makes a lot of sense to me. I think With my regular gaming group I’ll propose boosting the Elite infantry to 8 points. I anticipate some hand-wringing and whining from one fellow, but I expect it will be embraced without too much drama.
To me, this illustrates how difficult it can be to get points balance right - the interaction between multiple factors can produce a bigger imbalance than expected.
-
Thanks for that analysis Hobgoblin, that makes a lot of sense to me. I think With my regular gaming group I’ll propose boosting the Elite infantry to 8 points. I anticipate some hand-wringing and whining from one fellow, but I expect it will be embraced without too much drama.
Maybe raise it as a possibility before a game to see how the normal points go? So far, we've only played with a few unit types (Elite, Heavy, Support and Berserk Infantry; Primitive Infantry; and Fighting Vehicles). Perhaps the Xenomorphs and Xeno rules will cast a different light on things!
To me, this illustrates how difficult it can be to get points balance right - the interaction between multiple factors can produce a bigger imbalance than expected.
Yes, indeed: I think it's a minor miracle that the Dragon and Lion Rampant points system works so well. I've always found those games to be tremendously well balanced, with good reasons to take each troop type (even if it's only to use up a spare point in the case of Ravenous Hordes!).
I think the balance issue with Elite Infantry is that they're good at everything except strength points - but the high armour (which can be boosted further with an upgrade) makes that much less of a factor than it is in the other games, where default shooting and melee attacks are much more deadly.
-
I might be missing something (and my book hasn't arrived yet), but if you have units with longer range, shouldn't they be targeting units that won't have a chance to firefight them back? I know my opponent did it to me a few times.
-
I might be missing something (and my book hasn't arrived yet), but if you have units with longer range, shouldn't they be targeting units that won't have a chance to firefight them back? I know my opponent did it to me a few times.
As I understand the rules, when long-range unit (e.g. Support Infantry + Artillery) fires at an Elite Infantry unit, the latter can fire back subject to a 7+ roll. The extreme range will boost the Support Infantry unit's armour to 3, but the Elite Infantry will still typically cause a casualty (and two or three if they have Armour Piercing and a bit of luck).
The only units that can't shoot back under these circumstances are those that can't fire at extreme range (e.g. Berserk Infantry). But any unit with a range of 18" or more can shoot the length of the table (with the target gaining a +1 boost to armour after 18").
Unless your target units couldn't fire at extreme range (as Elite, Heavy, Support and Light Infantry can), you should have a had a chance to shoot back.
There is an 'indirect fire' upgrade for Support Infantry, but otherwise, most infantry units will be able to shoot back at their long-range attackers.
-
IIRC you can only 'firefight' up to your max range - not the length of the table. So there is a way to stand off and get a couple shots in without earning return fire. And elites can only firefight once. If you hit 'em twice, the second one is free.
Very situational, but at least a possibility.
-
Hmm, so a cagey player using a bunch of lower value units might be able to use one to draw the firefight return fire from the elites, then pile on fire from a couple higher value units without those being at risk of return fire. Given the armour value of elites, the lower value troops might still fail to cause damage, though.
It seems like it there are a bunch of interesting trade offs to consider. I am very much looking forward to reading my copy and n a couple days when it comes out from under the Christmas tree!
-
IIRC you can only 'firefight' up to your max range - not the length of the table. So there is a way to stand off and get a couple shots in without earning return fire.
I initially assumed that was the rule, but when I checked mid-game first time round, that didn't seem to be the case. I then went back and had a scan, and there's nothing in the sections on Shooting, Firefight and Weapon Ranges (pages 59-61) that rules out Firefight at extreme range. Nor is there any such prohibition in the individual Firefight sections in the troop descriptions. So I think all troop types with Firefight can fight back at extreme range.
-
I am also pretty sure that the rules state that firefight can only be carried out if the range is within your units normal range band.
P59 under shooting it states
If your unit is within the targets units own shoot value range, they may declare a Firefight reaction if it has the firefight special rule, which is successful on an activation test of 7+.
This makes it more complicated because you could potentially shoot from 48" if it was artillery upgraded??? I think it should mean if your unit is within its own shoot value range (more common sense ;D)
Glen
-
Very interested in this discussion. I have only read the book and built lists until now. From Hobgoblin’s experience, though, I think I‘ll use the tuned down firefight rules.
What irks me a little though is that the tuning down of unit dice might create models invincible to certain units.
Let’s see how it plays.
-
I am also pretty sure that the rules state that firefight can only be carried out if the range is within your units normal range band.
P59 under shooting it states
If your unit is within the targets units own shoot value range, they may declare a Firefight reaction if it has the firefight special rule, which is successful on an activation test of 7+.
Aha - yes, you and Warren are quite right! I must have just been parsing "Shoot Value range" as "range" when I read it the second time! No excuses, either, because the second paragraph of that section makes a clear distinction between "Shoot Value range" and "extreme range". Thanks!
This makes it more complicated because you could potentially shoot from 48" if it was artillery upgraded??? I think it should mean if your unit is within its own shoot value range (more common sense ;D)
Well, the upgrade does explicitly change the Shoot Value, so if one Support Infantry unit with Artillery shoots at another, there's definitely Firefight potential.
I'm now itching to get another game in to see if that addresses some of my concerns about Elite Infantry. In our game the other week, it would certainly have meant that the Support Infantry unit would have survived for at least another turn.
-
Hmm, so a cagey player using a bunch of lower value units might be able to use one to draw the firefight return fire from the elites, then pile on fire from a couple higher value units without those being at risk of return fire. Given the armour value of elites, the lower value troops might still fail to cause damage, though.
Yes, that's definitely a tactical element that the book calls out explicitly. And it adds a nice risk/reward element because the lowest-value troops don't get Shoot as a free action (so there's a potential turn-ending roll on it). So if you use Rabble, Light Infantry or Recon Infantry to draw the fire of opposing Elites, there's a chance that your plan will go awry.
And yes - if you used a 1-point unit to fire on the Elites, they might well get destroyed by Firefight. You would then be able to take free actions to shoot with as many Heavy Infantry as you had with line of sight, with no risk of Firefight, but you'd need a bit of luck to cause any damage (and a fair bit of luck if the Heavy Infantry weren't upgraded).
I should say, though, that my point about the Elite Infantry profile isn't that it models space marines/sardaukar/whatever poorly - it does a great job of that! It's that they seem a little undercosted. But I might well have been getting more wrong than just the Firefight range! ;)
-
What irks me a little though is that the tuning down of unit dice might create models invincible to certain units.
Do you mean when a unit goes to half strength - as in the example I brought up earlier of the Support Infantry being unable to damage the Fighting Vehicle after the former lost half its strength points? I thought of a potential upgrade for Support Infantry that might fix that (for the cannon-and-crew type of unit that I was fielding):
- Crewed weapon (+2 points per unit): This unit represents a powerful weapon that retains its full destructive potential after the loss of crew members but becomes more difficult to operate. When the unit is reduced to half strength, it continues to use 10 dice for Shoot actions but loses both the Firefight special rule and its free Shoot activation (the unit now requires 7+ to fire).
That would allow big guns to continue to pack a real punch, but with added tension as the remaining crew struggle to load and fire.
-
Do you mean when a unit goes to half strength - as in the example I brought up earlier of the Support Infantry being unable to damage the Fighting Vehicle after the former lost half its strength points? I thought of a potential upgrade for Support Infantry that might fix that (for the cannon-and-crew type of unit that I was fielding):
- Crewed weapon (+2 points per unit): This unit represents a powerful weapon that retains its full destructive potential after the loss of crew members but becomes more difficult to operate. When the unit is reduced to half strength, it continues to use 10 dice for Shoot actions but loses both the Firefight special rule and its free Shoot activation (the unit now requires 7+ to fire).
That would allow big guns to continue to pack a real punch, but with added tension as the remaining crew struggle to load and fire.
Yeah, that’s the one I was referring to, and it reminded me of all those monsters and warmachines who were immune to certain weapons. I’ll have to see.
The upgrade for the support gun makes sense, but any other unit below half starting strength will have a difficult time to damage vehicles (or won’t be able to, at all) - right?
-
The upgrade for the support gun makes sense, but any other unit below half starting strength will have a difficult time to damage vehicles (or won’t be able to, at all) - right?
Yes, that's right - unless they have the heavy-weapons, armour-piercing or anti-tank upgrades. Most non-Elite units struggle to damage Fighting Vehicles at full strength (a normal Light or Heavy Infantry unit needs six 6s out of 10 dice, for example), which feels right, but I wonder if this is an area where the switch from 12/6 to 10/5 has cut out a remote possibility that would have been more fun. (Once every so often, someone will throw six 6s ...)
I'm hoping to fit in another game today; one thing I'm interested to see is how the Xenomorph units play out with the 10/5 dice. I'm also keen to play a game with no Elite Infantry.
-
Yes, that's right - unless they have the heavy-weapons, armour-piercing or anti-tank upgrades. Most non-Elite units struggle to damage Fighting Vehicles at full strength (a normal Light or Heavy Infantry unit needs six 6s out of 10 dice, for example), which feels right, but I wonder if this is an area where the switch from 12/6 to 10/5 has cut out a remote possibility that would have been more fun. (Once every so often, someone will throw six 6s ...)
I'm hoping to fit in another game today; one thing I'm interested to see is how the Xenomorph units play out with the 10/5 dice. I'm also keen to play a game with no Elite Infantry.
Yeah. That was what I was thinking, too. It’s just a minor detail, as you rarely roll 6 hits, but it’s there. Further more, iirc, in Dragon Rampant no unit had an Armor >4.
In a way, I am okay with it, certain units should not be Tank killers, but then, I read about actual tank battles and think, well there should me a very slight chance, no matter how battered a unit is, there’s always that guy hiding ina foxhole and attempting to place a grenade at a vulnerable spot.
-
I've gotten to play 4 games with a variety of armies. (I have long played DR.)
The Elite Infantry does feel a little undercost. I have been playing the units under 50% Strength roll 6d6 rather than 5d6 as I prefer a little more grit for the wounded units and I think it benefits the small units more than the large units. Recon Infantry are really garbage with their risky activation numbers.
The scenarios are all over the place in balance. Alpha is just a straight line battle and balanced by definition. Golf is badly designed... the defender simply runs hoping not to miss too many activation tests. It needs to be reworked. Lima is also rather poor. The Defenders just bolt for the exits.
The balance of a 24 pt. Xenos Rampant army vs. a tank, 2 elite space marines and a Increased Hvy. Infantry is excellent. I would consider toning down the Wild Charge from 5+ to 6+ to make a slightly more tactical game with dissimilar foes.
-
I see what you mean about scenario Golf. The defender deploys after the Attacker and 24” away, and then only has to run 18” to get off the table.
Do you mean Lima, that is the defend against infinite attackers - so I don’t think running is an option
-
Do you mean Lima, that is the defend against infinite attackers - so I don’t think running is an option
After rereading, you seem to be right. The phrase "break open the pocket so that they can escape," the VP conditions balance well a fleeing Defender and the Attackers surrounding the Defenders suggested breakout was an option. The game I played had all the Defenders with "Wild Charge" which changed the game before it started.
The best strategy for the Attackers, if breakout is not an option, is to concentrate forces to benefit from the Commander.
The infinite Attackers reinforce very slowly. It is also unclear if a Move activation is required to reenter the fray and how close to an enemy they may deploy. I played that no roll was required and the only reinforcing unit came back on the last turn and was unable to act.
-
I read the VP awards to work out what was awarded, and skipped the narrative! Sounds like if the defender can hold out for 6 or so turns they have a fair chance of winning.
I’m just starting to get my head around the unit profiles and the various special rules to work out stat lines for the models I have. My initial thought is that the basic profiles are quite cheap, but the special rules quickly rack up the points!
-
I’m just starting to get my head around the unit profiles and the various special rules to work out stat lines for the models I have. My initial thought is that the basic profiles are quite cheap, but the special rules quickly rack up the points!
It occurred to me that the undercosting of Elite Infantry that we've picked up in our first couple of games has quite a bit to do with this. Unlike many other games (e.g. Song of Arthur and Merlin!), the Rampant series doesn't adjust upgrade costs according to the basic troop cost. That doesn't much matter in Lion or Dragon Rampant, where starting unit costs are in a fairly tight band (4-6 points for most 'serious' units), but it makes quite a difference in Xenos Rampant, where the starting ranges for mainstream units vary much more widely.
For example, Heavy Infantry cost 2 points per unit and Elite Infantry 6. If you give the Heavy Weapons upgrade to both units, they cost 4 and 8, respectively. And if you then add Armour Piercing, they cost 5 and 9. So, in effect, the Elite Infantry unit gets cheaper relative to the Heavy Infantry unit the more you soup both up - from three times as expensive to less than twice. That would suggest that the Heavy Infantry have become more powerful relative to the Elite Infantry, but I don't think that's the case.
Through those upgrades, the Heavy Infantry has got to a situation where it will often cause one casualty among the Elites per round of fire (a roll of 6 is needed for a hit; Amour Piercing means only three hits are required for a kill; and Heavy Weapons mean that 6s are doubled). That's certainly an improvement on requiring four 6s on 10 dice and typically causing no casualties.
Meanwhile, though, the Elite Infantry unit has gone from typically causing one casualty with a decent chance of a second (on a slightly better-than-average roll of six 4s, 5s or 6s) to typically causing three casualties (On a typical 10-dice roll, five dice will cause hits, and you'd expect at least one six, doubled by Heavy Weapons. So, with Armour Piercing, that's six hits and three strength points gone.).
So, an tit-for-tat exchange of fire between those units would, with the most probable number of hits on each roll, lead to the Heavy Infantry being wiped out and the Elite Infantry still being above half-strength. On top of that, the Elite Infantry unit will typically cause two casualties at extreme range and take none (unless the Heavy Infantry player rolls four sixes, in which case the Elites will take two).
That's where I see the points being a bit wonky compared with other Rampant games, where you generally "get what you pay for" in gains relative to other units (as in my example above about upgrading Bellicose Foot with Shiny Armour).
I don't have much of a mathematic brain (as the above back-of-envelope calculations probably show!), but I wonder if better balance might be achieved by (a) increasing Elite Foot to 8 points and/or (b) reducing upgrade costs for non-Elite units (e.g. Heavy Weapons for +1).
-
Recon with fire support look like a good match for an elite unit. 6 points, hit on a 4+ anywhere in sight but can’t be targeted over 12”
-
Recon with fire support look like a good match for an elite unit. 6 points, hit on a 4+ anywhere in sight but can’t be targeted over 12”
Hmm ... I'm not sure about that; the Fire Support action only succeeds on 8+, and it can't be taken as a Skirmish action. And if the Recon Infantry unit is in the open when the Elite unit gets within 12", you'd expect the Elites to wipe them out with one volley (and probably even with one below-average volley, given the negative modifiers for the courage test).
All in all, you'd probably only get a couple of Fire Support strikes in at best before the Elites closed in, still (typical) above half-strength. And if the Recon unit has to move into cover earlier in the game, that's a turn or two where they won't be calling down Fire Support. Also, 8+ for Fire Support is turnover central!
Now, I'm sure that you could get lots of great game (and game-changing) situations involving Recon Infantry and Fire Support. It looks a really interesting combination for the game. But a basic Elite unit still looks to be a lot more bang for your buck (just as fast, much harder to kill, and much more offensive power with free Shoot and Attack actions). I reckon Recon + Fire Support would be good value at 4 points relative to the 6 for Elite.
-
So the answer to an Elite unit is wait for it...............another Elite unit.
Elite units seem to very much like Dreadnought battleships, the only reply to them was another Battleship or a horde of MBTs or later an Aircraft carrier. M`mm that's got me thinking of playing a naval game with the rules or even BattleTech, but I digress.
Maybe each side should only be allowed 0-1 Elite unit (max 12pts with upgrades) per 24pts spend, after all if they are the elite they are not going to be plentiful (Yes, even Space Marines) as they have a whole planet to defeat.
I have only briefly tried a 24pt game of Chaos Marines (2 Elite SMU or 2RMU units) and 2 Light infantry units (10 cultists (I think)) V.s 4 Elite 1 or 2MU Space Marines, but the Elites pretty much chewed through every other non-elite target. This is only right and proper, but it has put me off the game a bit (at least for using it as a 40K analogue) I think One Page Rules Grimdark Future does a much better job of this, but for other non-40K games it may be ok. But I still don't really like the vehicle rules, but I admit I've not yet tried them.
Oh well more experiments later, happy gaming in 2023 everyone :D
Glen
-
So the answer to an Elite unit is wait for it...............another Elite unit.
That did make me laugh :D
Yesterday I statted-up a 5 squad Task Force of my dwarf ‘Colonial Marines’. I was pleased to be able to arrive at a mix of core unit types and ‘extra’ rules that reflect the perceived role of each squad, while coming in at a total of 24 points. I’ve not played them yet and I’ve also yet to stat-up their primary opposition. None of them are elite units, though I will have a dwarf Jedi-like figure to add idc, who’ll likely be Elite but with Close Quarter Doctrine.
I must admit I haven’t delved too much into the maths, preferring instead to focus on my background story and what options are appropriate to it. From what I’ve recently read in this thread, I doubt I’d fair at all well against a player fielding a full force of tooled-up elites simply because they could, but tbh that’s an unlikely situation as the people I play with are generally interested in exploring the scenario/story rather than points-maximisation for the win.
Each to their own of course, and some players will want a maxed-out force, which kinda makes me think of the suited-up Martian Marines in The Expanse, who could pretty much defeat everything (apart from proto-molecule enhanced opposition, if I’m remembering it correctly). In which case, it seems to me that there’s still fun to be had from losing, it’s just a matter of trying to contain the losses.
-
We've only played a handful of games, but I think the "answer" to Elite units may be to play the scenarios from the book. In a straight fight the Elite units are very hard to deal with, but with only three units on the table you'll struggle to fulfil the objectives of some of the scenarios.
-
Hmm ... I'm not sure about that; the Fire Support action only succeeds on 8+, and it can't be taken as a Skirmish action. And if the Recon Infantry unit is in the open when the Elite unit gets within 12", you'd expect the Elites to wipe them out with one volley (and probably even with one below-average volley, given the negative modifiers for the courage test).
All in all, you'd probably only get a couple of Fire Support strikes in at best before the Elites closed in, still (typical) above half-strength. And if the Recon unit has to move into cover earlier in the game, that's a turn or two where they won't be calling down Fire Support. Also, 8+ for Fire Support is turnover central!
Now, I'm sure that you could get lots of great game (and game-changing) situations involving Recon Infantry and Fire Support. It looks a really interesting combination for the game. But a basic Elite unit still looks to be a lot more bang for your buck (just as fast, much harder to kill, and much more offensive power with free Shoot and Attack actions). I reckon Recon + Fire Support would be good value at 4 points relative to the 6 for Elite.
Agreed. Crunching some numbers nothing is as good as Elite Infantry, full stop. They out perform everything, mostly due to that 4+ to hit with free shoot. Even if you can get them in an advantageous firefight (eg Support infantry at 24") they are so flexible they can simply change what they are doing - they don't need to sit there and take it.
-
Agreed. Crunching some numbers nothing is as good as Elite Infantry, full stop. They out perform everything, mostly due to that 4+ to hit with free shoot. Even if you can get them in an advantageous firefight (eg Support infantry at 24") they are so flexible they can simply change what they are doing - they don't need to sit there and take it.
But for a unit-type described in the rules as being not “just the best soldiers in the army, these are the best soldiers in the Galaxy”, perhaps that’s about right.
-
But for a unit-type described in the rules as being not “just the best soldiers in the army, these are the best soldiers in the Galaxy”, perhaps that’s about right.
...but cost not much more to equip and train than a bunch of Orcs?
Their combat performance is right, just the cost to field them is wrong. If they are going to be that good they need to be more expensive and hence a lot rarer
-
...but cost not much more to equip and train than a bunch of Orcs?
Their combat performance is right, just the cost to field them is wrong. If they are going to be that good they need to be more expensive and hence a lot rarer
I do get that. 8)
I suppose I see XR as a friends-vs-friends fun game, so it doesn’t really bother me. That said, playing with mates I can foresee a campaign game where a much weaker force might need to be played against say 3 elites*, with the weaker player just trying not to be slaughtered. I’m not sure such a game would be within the rules if the Elite were priced at their true worth. Each to their own of course. :)
Eg: 3 Jedi versus shed-loads of Storm Troopers.
-
I think you could already do that with 8 point Elites. 12 units of heavy infantry vs the Jedi. It’s going to be a slaughter for sure.
The rules had so much promise but I really feel they have sort of hit the post with them. It sort of looks like the rules George Lucas would have come up with for those ridiculous prequel battle scenes.
-
We've only played a handful of games, but I think the "answer" to Elite units may be to play the scenarios from the book. In a straight fight the Elite units are very hard to deal with, but with only three units on the table you'll struggle to fulfil the objectives of some of the scenarios.
Any good scenarios to recommend? I have been randomly rolling and many seem to be quite unbalanced against the force trying to move. (Alpha is an obvious exception.)
-
The rules had so much promise but I really feel they have sort of hit the post with them. It sort of looks like the rules George Lucas would have come up with for those ridiculous prequel battle scenes.
Is it just under-costed Elites that's the perceived issue? Seems a small fix.
-
Not just that but it sort of doesn’t feel different enough to LR? Eg keeping the same unit types, the underwhelming vehicle rules, the over emphasis on melee. It’s basically LR in space in the way 40k was WFB in space. It could have been that much more.
Eg emphasise cover, situational awareness and leadership. These are the core of a modern battlefield. If you are seen you’re basically dead. This could have been emphasised in the rules. Likewise the infantry, armour, artillery triangle. A sort of modern rock paper scissors where each needs the other. The Elite is a symptom of what’s wrong. You don’t need any other unit type, just send in elites. There is no counter, then a counter to that counter.
-
I realise that Elite units are the "best of the best in the whole galaxy", but there does seem to be a pretty big gap between them and the next unit down on the power scale (Heavy Infantry). This feels a bit awkward when you're wanting to field an elite force that's still great, but not quite pinnacle-of-the glactic-scale good.
I wonder if dropping the free actions and reducing Elites to 5pt baseline would help, and then allow them to buy back each of the free actions at an extra point cost (say 2pts each action) as part of the optional upgrades? They already have a great statline all-round, so even without the two free actions, Elite units are still highly reliable and competent troops. Buying back both free actions raises them to 9pts (a 50% cost increase on where they are currently), which again feels about right for what are supposed to be such incredible and (presumably rare) troops that you don't even need to risk a failed activation ordering them for most of the game.
The bigger hole in the rules for me is the very basic treatment of vehicles. :? I hope there might be a supplement planned that treats vehicles much more thoroughly, to replace the basic efforts in the core book. I do understand the emphasis is on infantry for this game, but the current vehicle rules feel very much like a reluctant afterthought unfortunately. This is a shame, as wacky/improbable/exotic vehicles are very much a sci-fi staple in a great many cases.
@ jon_1066:
I think that what you want to emphasise would then pigeonhole the overall game rules of XR into something that would then be difficult to fit Space Opera or sci-fi Weird WW2 elements into. For years I wanted something that was "hard" sci-fi combat (lethal, and with emphasis on cover and ranged combat), but that still allowed for more Space Opera elements in it... Infinity came closest to that I think, but I came to realise that those two things just didn't really mix all that well, and that wanting a ruleset to do both well was largely therefore futile. XR tends more to what I might call "film sci-fi", which allows it to dabble in most things a bit, and that's fine if you just want to get models down on the table for an hour or two of fun that's not too taxing. For your purposes, the upcoming Ambush Alley Games ruleset (currently working under the name "Next War", and designed to replace the OOP and rather incomplete "Tomorrow's War") might be much more your speed. :)
-
I wonder if dropping the free actions and reducing Elites to 5pt baseline would help, and then allow them to buy back each of the free actions at an extra point cost (say 2pts each action) as part of the optional upgrades? They already have a great statline all-round, so even without the two free actions, Elite units are still highly reliable and competent troops. Buying back both free actions raises them to 9pts (a 50% cost increase on where they are currently), which again feels about right for what are supposed to be such incredible and (presumably rare) troops that you don't even need to risk a failed activation ordering them for most of the game.
That’s an interesting alternative.
-
@ jon_1066:
I think that what you want to emphasise would then pigeonhole the overall game rules of XR into something that would then be difficult to fit Space Opera or sci-fi Weird WW2 elements into. For years I wanted something that was "hard" sci-fi combat (lethal, and with emphasis on cover and ranged combat), but that still allowed for more Space Opera elements in it... Infinity came closest to that I think, but I came to realise that those two things just didn't really mix all that well, and that wanting a ruleset to do both well was largely therefore futile. XR tends more to what I might call "film sci-fi", which allows it to dabble in most things a bit, and that's fine if you just want to get models down on the table for an hour or two of fun that's not too taxing. For your purposes, the upcoming Ambush Alley Games ruleset (currently working under the name "Next War", and designed to replace the OOP and rather incomplete "Tomorrow's War") might be much more your speed. :)
I think you are probably right. Perhaps I should simply aim for WW2 in space as my wish list!
Well I shan't give up on Xenos but at the minute I think I'll just drop the Elite Infantry and it could still be a fun game. After all the galaxy is a very large place so the best troops in the galaxy are surely hard to find!
Just now need to address some of the other points quirks. eg why would heavy infantry pay 2 points to increase their close combat attack by 1? Why take a mob when you can take a large light infantry unit with close combat and courage 5 for the same 1 point?
I think something like Orks - Beserk Infantry. marines (chaos or space) - Heavy infantry, Imperial Guard - light infantry, Eldar - light infantry with cloaking, don't have any Tau so don't need to worry about them, genestealers are your classic lesser xenomorphs. That's most of my main scifi factions covered.
-
….I think I'll just drop the Elite Infantry and it could still be a fun game. After all the galaxy is a very large place so the best troops in the galaxy are surely hard to find!
That’s pretty much my take as well.
-
Or give the elites to the new/poorer player.
A kind of handicap system. This kind of idea was proposed to me
(over 50 years ago) by my first wargames opponent (Steve O'leary).
He proposed a campaign based on Republican Rome's practice.
Good general's don't need as much support. Start with 1000pts (WRG)
win a battle & the Senate reduces your army to 900pts & so on.
At the end of the campaign the player with just 3 messengers & a dog
is obviously a s**t hot general.
lol lol lol
-
I think I'll just drop the Elite Infantry and it could still be a fun game. After all the galaxy is a very large place so the best troops in the galaxy are surely hard to find!
I've been coming around to the conclusion that Elites are probably meant to represent that heroic band of troops you see in films - often with one or more main characters in them. In 40k terms, it would perhaps be an Inquisitor and their retinue, a single squad of Grey Knight Terminators let by a Captain, or a Space Marine Chapter Master and their retinue/bodyguard, etc. It would not be regular Marines or such.
Just now need to address some of the other points quirks. eg why would heavy infantry pay 2 points to increase their close combat attack by 1? Why take a mob when you can take a large light infantry unit with close combat and courage 5 for the same 1 point?
There's a lot of odd choices in the unit types, and also a fair bit of compression where certain units and upgrades are just more expensive (or better/worse) versions of others, or where units from other games just don't translate very well at all. To use 40k again (since everyone knows what it is and likely has models for it), the difference between Eldar Guardians and Aspect Warriors is difficult to work out, because they are quite different; but if you treat Aspect Warriors as Heavy Infantry, then they (1) overlap with Marines, and (2) still don't feel like they work correctly. Also, getting the Eldar Corsairs onto the table using the Mercenaries rules seemed like a fun translation - until I read the Mercenary rule. :?
I think something like Orks - Beserk Infantry. marines (chaos or space) - Heavy infantry, Imperial Guard - light infantry, Eldar - light infantry with cloaking, don't have any Tau so don't need to worry about them, genestealers are your classic lesser xenomorphs. That's most of my main scifi factions covered.
Hmm, in a pinch that'd work, but you wouldn't get much differentiation between unit types in the same force (perhaps an upgrade or special rule).
I also found heavy and special weapons tricky to represent in the rules. A five-man Tactical squad of Marines with a missile launcher could have the Heavy Weapons upgrade. A similar five-man Devastator squad of Marines with four missile launchers would be... Um, the same? :-I I feel that some upgrades should only last whilst the unit is at full strength, and then be removed when the unit is at half strength. So the Tac squad would only get the benefit of Heavy Weapons until the squad is reduced, and then lose it; the Devastator squad however would keep the Heavy Weapons upgrade until the last man is removed from the unit. Where full/partial upgrades like this are offered, the upgrade could have a split cost indicated.
I realise that 40k is... An odd game, in many respects, and that fitting it neatly into XR might be tricky. However, I've tried other units from other franchises, and rubbed up against the same thing each time. Weirdly, in Dragon Rampant, there seems to be less of this, and then unit types seem to be better spread out. I'm therefore really not sure why XR has created all the profiles and upgrades it has. ???
-
I realise that Elite units are the "best of the best in the whole galaxy", but there does seem to be a pretty big gap between them and the next unit down on the power scale (Heavy Infantry). This feels a bit awkward when you're wanting to field an elite force that's still great, but not quite pinnacle-of-the glactic-scale good.
I wonder if dropping the free actions and reducing Elites to 5pt baseline would help, and then allow them to buy back each of the free actions at an extra point cost (say 2pts each action) as part of the optional upgrades? They already have a great statline all-round, so even without the two free actions, Elite units are still highly reliable and competent troops. Buying back both free actions raises them to 9pts (a 50% cost increase on where they are currently), which again feels about right for what are supposed to be such incredible and (presumably rare) troops that you don't even need to risk a failed activation ordering them for most of the game.
That's an elegant idea - but it does leave you with a default situation in which an Elite Infantry unit is less likely to shoot than a Heavy Infantry one. I think we all generally agree that the Elite Infantry profile is an accurate portrayal of space marines/Sardaukar/whatever, so it might be easier just to boost the cost to 8 or 9 points.
We've only played a handful of games, but I think the "answer" to Elite units may be to play the scenarios from the book. In a straight fight the Elite units are very hard to deal with, but with only three units on the table you'll struggle to fulfil the objectives of some of the scenarios.
Yup - I've only played the 'straight fight' scenario, so might well be missing something. That said, though, you get four plain-vanilla Elite units for your 24 points, and they are fast as well as tough.
Not just that but it sort of doesn’t feel different enough to LR? Eg keeping the same unit types, the underwhelming vehicle rules, the over emphasis on melee. It’s basically LR in space in the way 40k was WFB in space. It could have been that much more.
One 'legacy' aspect of the other Rampant games that feels a bit odd is that most units can't move and fire. You can't have your Imperial Stormtroopers do this, for example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6JXuSpSRCs
A fix would be to give all units a (non-Free) 'Move and Shoot' action with a shooting penalty. But if the penalty's applied to the Shoot roll (as with vehicles), Light and Heavy Infantry will be unable to score any hits. So perhaps a +1 to the target's Armour instead? That would make cover even more important for light troop types in defending positions.
In any case, I do think the crossbow/musket dynamic of the Rampant games feels a bit odd here. I'm thinking of games like FUBAR that allow moving and shooting, or the many other sci-fi skirmish games that allow more than one action per activation. One situation that arose frequently in our games was a Heavy Infantry unit being caught in the open and having little option but to shoot and hope (against hope) that it would suppress the Elite unit bearing down on it. It didn't ever work, but it seemed a better bet than moving towards cover (more than one move needed to reach it!) or going to ground (which doesn't change the average number of casualties inflicted by an Elite unit). A 'move and shoot' action would have given that unit a better chance of getting into cover while its members provided covering fire for each other ("Go! Go! Go!").
On the strength of a couple of games of each, I currently think that The Men Who Would Be Kings is the better game. We used it for some 40Kish sci-fi games last year, and it worked quite well with some genre-appropriate tweaks (I recall that we gave space marines two Shooting dice per figure and required two hits to remove each at close range or melee). I suspect XR might have been better using TMWWBK as the base rather than DR/LR. Of course, there's ample opportunity for mashing up the two rulesets ...
In particular, the one-die-per-figure principle in TMWWBK seems a better fit for a small-unit sci-fi game (and allows a range of weaponry - from one die for a basic gun to two or even three for your bolters and storm bolters and whatnot). And you could still use the Strength Points principle on top of it.
I think a die (or two or three!) per figure is a better bet for a shooty game with squads of five figures. That way, you avoid anomalies like the firepower of a Heavy Infantry unit reduced to two men. In XR, if that unit started with five men, it rolls five dice and hits on 6. But if it started with ten men, it's twice as effective: five dice and hits on 5. But you might have the very same figures on the tabletop ("Ah, but these guys used to have more friends!").
So I wonder if XR should perhaps have been The Xenomorphs Who Would Be God-Emperor.
Each to their own of course, and some players will want a maxed-out force, which kinda makes me think of the suited-up Martian Marines in The Expanse, who could pretty much defeat everything (apart from proto-molecule enhanced opposition, if I’m remembering it correctly). In which case, it seems to me that there’s still fun to be had from losing, it’s just a matter of trying to contain the losses.
Yes, doomed last stands can certainly make for great games. And I agree with you that the Rampant series are for friendly, fun games (the only kind worth playing, in my view!). But the issue here isn't so much that players wickedly max out their forces to win, but that they stat up what they have and end up with an army that produces one-sided games. For example, our regular father-and-son opponents have sci-fi forces consisting entirely of gloriously painted Primaris space marines. They're naturally going to stat those up as Elite Infantry, which naturally means three or four Elite squads per player (depending on upgrades). The old school friend with whom I play occasional games has squad upon squad of prize-winning Ultramarines. So if we play the game, it's always going to be Elite Infantry and perhaps a Fighting Vehicle on one side. I'm sure that's a common situation for sci-fi gamers.
Again, the contrast with the natural balance of the other Rampant rules is striking. If someone turns up with elves or chaos warriors for Dragon Rampant and stats up an entirely Elite force, it doesn't unbalance the game (there are keys for those locks in the defensive qualities of Heavy Foot or the aggression of Bellicose Foot and Lesser/Greater Warbeasts). And one of the purest joys of the Rampant series is when you lure someone's Elite Cavalry into the woods with your measly Ravenous Horde ...
Also, a great strength of the Rampant series is the ease of starting up a side and the short 'time to table'. All in all, I probably prefer a game of Saga to Lion or Dragon Rampant. But Saga's quite an involved game to get going, especially if you (a) haven't played it for a while and (b) have new players to introduce to the game - or unfamiliar battleboards to introduce to players. By contrast, Dragon Rampant is a game that you can get going quickly and which plays intuitively. And that's a real advantage that more than offsets my slight preference for the way Saga plays - which is why we've played much more LR/DR than Saga.
So far - and I have to caveat this that it's only based on a couple of games - XR doesn't have that quality of "throw some models on the table and get a nicely balanced game". Both times, our experience has been "throw some models on the table and get a very unbalanced game".
At the worst, though, XR will be a good toolkit for use on TMWWBK. And we're certainly going to play through some more rules-as-written games using other scenarios. Initial impressions aren't everything; it's just that they're not as rosy as they were with the other Rampant games.
-
That's an elegant idea - but it does leave you with a default situation in which an Elite Infantry unit is less likely to shoot than a Heavy Infantry one. I think we all generally agree that the Elite Infantry profile is an accurate portrayal of space marines/Sardaukar/whatever, so it might be easier just to boost the cost to 8 or 9 points.
Maybe, maybe not. The problem is that Elites are just fantastic, and then there is a huge gulf downwards to the next unit in terms of overall power. So whilst yes, Space Marines are that elite in the background, in games terms they become rather common and therefore boring.
Also, the Elite statline is still far better than anything else in game even with no free actions. So whilst HI are more likely to shoot, and LI are more likely to move, Elites are still reliable at either of those actions and better overall, and are therefore less likely to be trapped into this scenario:
One situation that arose frequently in our games was a Heavy Infantry unit being caught in the open and having little option but to shoot and hope (against hope) that it would suppress the Elite unit bearing down on it. It didn't ever work, but it seemed a better bet than moving towards cover (more than one move needed to reach it!) or going to ground (which doesn't change the average number of casualties inflicted by an Elite unit).
By having Elite units buy the free actions back as upgrades, it also leaves a bit of room for un-upgraded Elite units to be a bit less elite, and to use the extra couple of points saved for different unit upgrades instead. I admit, my comments here are coloured heavily (but not exclusively) by Space Marines! lol But they still apply in lots of other situations too. :)
-
In our last game we experimented with Marines as HI and a single unit of Elite to represent the commander and his retinue. If you take five man Marine squads as reduced model count large units they're good without dominating.
One other suggestion was capping Elites at a single unit, like vehicles.
TBH were still learning and the use of scenarios has been a bit of a leveller so I think we're kind of fine with Elites as written at the moment.
-
I've been coming around to the conclusion that Elites are probably meant to represent that heroic band of troops you see in films - often with one or more main characters in them. In 40k terms, it would perhaps be an Inquisitor and their retinue, a single squad of Grey Knight Terminators let by a Captain, or a Space Marine Chapter Master and their retinue/bodyguard, etc. It would not be regular Marines or such.
There's a lot of odd choices in the unit types, and also a fair bit of compression where certain units and upgrades are just more expensive (or better/worse) versions of others, or where units from other games just don't translate very well at all. To use 40k again (since everyone knows what it is and likely has models for it), the difference between Eldar Guardians and Aspect Warriors is difficult to work out, because they are quite different; but if you treat Aspect Warriors as Heavy Infantry, then they (1) overlap with Marines, and (2) still don't feel like they work correctly. Also, getting the Eldar Corsairs onto the table using the Mercenaries rules seemed like a fun translation - until I read the Mercenary rule. :?
Hmm, in a pinch that'd work, but you wouldn't get much differentiation between unit types in the same force (perhaps an upgrade or special rule).
…
All my figures are RT era so I’m not so worried about that. So long as the different forces feel different then that’s OK
-
Maybe, maybe not. The problem is that Elites are just fantastic, and then there is a huge gulf downwards to the next unit in terms of overall power. So whilst yes, Space Marines are that elite in the background, in games terms they become rather common and therefore boring.
Yeah - that gulf is at the heart of the (perceived - early days yet, etc. ...) problem. I wonder if Heavy Infantry might work better with a starting Shoot Value of 5+ - so that an upgraded 10-strong unit would compete on equal terms with Elite Infantry in a firefight (but would still be slower, less durable, etc.). That 4:6 point ratio with at least one area of equal footing (and superiority in strength points) seems a bit more like the relative costs and effectiveness of Heavy (or Bellicose) and Elite Foot in Dragon Rampant.
In our last game we experimented with Marines as HI and a single unit of Elite to represent the commander and his retinue. If you take five man Marine squads as reduced model count large units they're good without dominating.
That's a good idea - must try it!
One other suggestion was capping Elites at a single unit, like vehicles.
Yes - that makes sense. Our experience was that a heavily upgraded Fighting Vehicle (Artillery, Armour Piercing, Walker) was roughly a match for a an upgraded Elite unit - but there was just one of the former!
TBH were still learning and the use of scenarios has been a bit of a leveller so I think we're kind of fine with Elites as written at the moment.
It would be quite a fun experiment to play every scenario with four Elite Infantry units on one side and see how many (if any!) they lose.
-
Another possible alternative is to give the player with just Elites a point limit lower than that given to the player without Elites (e.g. 24 vs. 32, or 30 vs. 36). This could fit into many scenarios: imagine a situation where an Imperial vessel (the only one in sector) sends in the Marine contingent to attack a planetary installation (perhaps a laboratory researching forbidden technology; or the palace of the local ruler). The Marines are limited to what was available aboard the one cruiser (perhaps 3 squads), while the planetary force has more available upon which it can call. And it could give the non-Elite more of a fighting chance (e.g. perhaps having two units with the on-call fire support option, increasing the odds of getting a hit; this would be especially true if the table was longer, forcing the Marines to move farther to engage the FOs, and if the Marines were under fire from other units trying to prevent their movement)
-
That's a good idea: essentially upping the points available to the non-Elite player rather than changing the points costs themselves.
We haven't managed another game yet; I do want to try all the scenarios with a '4 x Elite Infantry' force to see what its win ratio is!
-
I have played the last 3 games (Alpha Scenario) with 8 pts. for elite infantry. The side with EI won two of the three games. FWIW.
-
I have played the last 3 games (Alpha Scenario) with 8 pts. for elite infantry. The side with EI won two of the three games. FWIW.
Interesting! Were these wholly EI sides, or mix and match?
-
My experience is very, very limited from playing against myself. Yet, I do think, Hobgoblin’s idea to use XR as a toolkit to tune TMWWBK sounds very attractive.
What I do miss in XR are more options for weapons especially hevy weapons. That would be very easy to represent with TMWWBK‘s 1+ die/model.
Also activation in TMWWBK seems to be better representing modern conflicts in using the officer‘s leadership and not the troop type for that. This allows to represent tough units that are poorly led (orks) as well as extraordinarily well trained/led light troops (SW rebels),
Looking forward to reading more experience reports here.
-
Interesting! Were these wholly EI sides, or mix and match?
The first was 3 EI units. The other two were a mix... 2 and 1 units IIRC.
-
Is there somewhere online to share any units/armies that we create? Please don't say Facebook.
-
Is there somewhere online to share any units/armies that we create? Please don't say Facebook.
How about the Rampant Forum going since Lion Rampant... with sub boards added per new edition.
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/duxrampant/
-
How about the Rampant Forum going since Lion Rampant... with sub boards added per new edition.
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/duxrampant/
Thanks for that. Not seeing a lot of Xenos Rampant on there though.
-
Thanks for that. Not seeing a lot of Xenos Rampant on there though.
Erm, your right.
I game with one of the Moderators so I'll ask him about that.
-
In the Post Apoc scenario there are rules for AI zombies to appear and combat both combatants. These rules keep referring to a zombie “pack”. Is a “pack” the same as a “unit”? That is about 5 ST points?
-
Is there somewhere online to share any units/armies that we create? Please don't say Facebook.
Share them here, I most definitely wanna see them.
-
I've posted some Post Apoc XR Detachments over in that area that I'd love to hear thoughts on. I've got three up at the moment, with another three to do.
https://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=129236.msg1801197#msg1801197
-
In the Post Apoc scenario there are rules for AI zombies to appear and combat both combatants. These rules keep referring to a zombie “pack”. Is a “pack” the same as a “unit”? That is about 5 ST points?
Page 161 says "treat these creatures as Militia Rabble with the Ravenous Horde option and the Undead xeno rule".
Militia Rabble has 10 Strength Points.