Welcome to Steamforged Games Forums

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Sign in to follow this  
Ruffy

Simultaneous counter-attacks and accurate goal kicks

So, I'm not a veteran and it's possible similar topics have been discussed before, but I'd like to talk a little about things that could subjectively improve the game... or not. :)

Number 1 is counter-attacks. I am aware of the tactics behind it, but I'm not too happy about players possibly being stranded after the first attack. I'd consider it a NPE, simply because it doesn't look like playbooks are used as a balancing factor in this aspect and also because it makes melee range a gigantic divider when it comes to efficiency, which is a point that has been made often already. Character Plays that grant dodges/pushes are also a little undervalued IMO. A possible solution to this possibly existing problem would be if counter-attacks would happen simultanously with the initial attack and the active player chose in which order to apply the results. So for example if the counter-attack comes up with a push-dodge, the other player can choose either a push or a dodge to re-establish engagement if the models were b2b and the active model has a 1" melee zone. I don't think this would require re-balancing all around.

 

Number 2, I think that goal kicks are a little too inaccurate. Not a big problem, but I'd like to have more influence on where the ball lands, it feels to me like this is the wrong spot for huge randomness... purely subjective.

 

Since there's not much happening on the forums at the moment, maybe people would like to discuss this. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The counter attack change would be a huge buff to any attacker with dodges and a nerf to anyone with a low << >> or ><.  At the very least all these players would need minor rebalancing.  I'd argue that sitting there helpless while your opponent unloads a full stack into your player while you can do nothing is a worse NPE that the risky resource trade that is a counter attack.

As far as goal kicks are concerned, I think the built in risk is part of the deliberate design.  Reducing it would require reducing how many VP a goal is worth which would slow the game down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By goal kick I meant the ball returning to play after a goal has been scored, not the actual shot on goal, sorry for the confusion.

I still think the counter-attack change would work well, but it could also be that the good counter-results are on the wrong players, which is very frustrating for 1" melee players on the offensive. It would be a small boost for beater-teams which are not running the meta at the moment as far as I can tell. Players being less slippery means that bashing has more value.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wouldn't surprise me if super fan was a rules test disguised as a plot card in the same vein as tap in and home crowd.

A super fan effect (possibly 4" instead of 6", but I don't think it is a big deal) would reduce the randomness of kicking out and let's you have players "guarding the goal" in a thematic sense imo.

As for the counter attack thing i don't like your suggestion at all, mostly because how every models playbook is designed around the current rules.

However, I do think that there could be some additional effect besides KD to stop counter attacking. Perhaps some trait like Ulfrs "extra mom for def stance" but for counter attacks. Or what I feel would be best is a new playbook result something like "stunned", that has no other effect than cancels a declared counterattack. It would let more players have answers to strong counterattacks without having to give out more 2" melees or putting KDs on every 1" melee model.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Ruffy said:

By goal kick I meant the ball returning to play after a goal has been scored, not the actual shot on goal, sorry for the confusion.

I still think the counter-attack change would work well, but it could also be that the good counter-results are on the wrong players, which is very frustrating for 1" melee players on the offensive. It would be a small boost for beater-teams which are not running the meta at the moment as far as I can tell. Players being less slippery means that bashing has more value.

 

The counter attack change you propose removes the hit for knockdown on the original attack option to stop them. Which is normally pretty good for models trying to do beat down. I think your change means that they will have to go for an attack option that is of no use to them, as opposed to one which helped them. So the change may help some players but it also hinders a lot of the beatdown players. But I haven't looked at playbooks enough to really work out how much it hurts/helps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a fair point, but KD is a really powerful tool at the moment and it's often what prevents players from declaring counter-attacks at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Ruffy said:

That's a fair point, but KD is a really powerful tool at the moment and it's often what prevents players from declaring counter-attacks at all.

 Yes exactly. GB is extremely KD centric. The existence of KD in a playbook highly determines the value of parting blows and the susceptiblity to counter attacks. 

It would just be nice to have wider options of dealing with strong counter attacks than KD or 2" melee. (Starting engaged helps a lot too) 

Though I don't think it is a big problem really. But we were spitballing possible improvements here :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't know why Character Plays aren't allowed on parting blows.  I get the "no re-positioning" thing, that makes sense, why not just emphasize that it holds true if your Character Play includes one?  Hamstring, Smashed Shins, Singled Out, Gut and String; all of these make a lot of sense to apply to someone walking away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Atras I always figured it was to keep plays like We'd They Go? and Unmasking from sneaking past the no repositions rule.  I'm right there with you about plays like Hamstring Smashed Shins and Rapid Animal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, MechMage said:

@Atras I always figured it was to keep plays like We'd They Go? and Unmasking from sneaking past the no repositions rule.  I'm right there with you about plays like Hamstring Smashed Shins and Rapid Animal.

It was Clone that really put the fly in the ointment for these. Midas was untouchable. It was a very early errata.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Warpstoned said:

Yes exactly. GB is extremely KD centric.

Knockdown isn't nearly as valuable in counterattacking as you might think -- the attacking player only has to select a momentous result to make the KD worthless (unless they've already healed/cleared conditions this turn).

 

Pushes and dodges are way more powerful for counter attacks than KD is -- KD prevents counter attacks, but it's not usually a good choice on a counter.

 

KD in S1-2 was so powerful because you could KD someone at the bottom of the turn and they couldn't take first activation without being stranded.  Home Crowd makes that much less true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MilitaryCoo said:

KD in S1-2 was so powerful because you could KD someone at the bottom of the turn and they couldn't take first activation without being stranded.  Home Crowd makes that much less true.

That's still true if the player with the downed model goes first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MilitaryCoo said:

Knockdown isn't nearly as valuable in counterattacking as you might think -- the attacking player only has to select a momentous result to make the KD worthless (unless they've already healed/cleared conditions this turn).

 

Pushes and dodges are way more powerful for counter attacks than KD is -- KD prevents counter attacks, but it's not usually a good choice on a counter.

 

KD in S1-2 was so powerful because you could KD someone at the bottom of the turn and they couldn't take first activation without being stranded.  Home Crowd makes that much less true.

I do agree with you. That is why I wrote "susceptibility to counter attacks".

KD is the main way to discourage or nullify a declared counter by a model with an easy << or >>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ruffy said:

That's still true if the player with the downed model goes first.

But they get to pick who the first model is to go, so they have a good chance of being able to earn momentum before the opponent can do anything.

I found KD was the counter attack result of choice during early games, but as we got better at the game, its a much less useful option. And when it could be an issue., I can probably pick a model to target that can't easily knock me down on a counter attack. (this might also have tied in with the home crowd change. being able to knock down the model they would want to use first could completely ruin a turn as they had to scramble for momentum else where to stand them up)

Mind you, its also rare that I find I'm stuck in the middle of nowhere with influence to burn because of a counter attack. If its likely the enemy is able to push me out of engagement, then I don't target them unless I have to, or have a plan to make use of that influence some other way. (It still happens, but now its either expected, or they have got really lucky on their rolls and reached a playbook result they really shouldn't have)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this