Author Topic: Vehicles in AE-WWII - feedback requested  (Read 656 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Cilionelle

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Это не моя осьминог
Vehicles in AE-WWII - feedback requested
« on: January 24, 2011, 05:45:36 PM »
Hey guys,

Got this e-mail from Chris at Darkson Designs.  Wanted to drop it in here and get some feedback.  Feel free to post what you think is right or wrong about vehicles in AE-WWII.

Quote
Hi Tom,

You posted a while back that your game group has become anti-vehicle in AE-ww2.

Why?

Is it the rules? The person who plays them? The way they're used in scenarios?

I would really appreciate it if you could write me back with some thoughts about the issues you guys have with the rules. We're tightening up what we've got for bounty and I'd rather not make the same mistakes.

Cheers!
Thanks to denial, Carson's no longer immortal.

Offline carson

  • El Presidente
  • Hero Member
  • *****
Re: Vehicles in AE-WWII - feedback requested
« Reply #1 on: January 24, 2011, 05:56:25 PM »
They're too powerful. When the veichle is destroyed the crew is fine. So you're getting a free crew + armoured beast.

Plus being able to move, then shoot, then move, then shoot and stuff is a bit wang.

I think the game works better without the tanks and just some good old foot sloggin' love.

Offline psychomanicd

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • please don't hesitate... to ask someone else first
Re: Vehicles in AE-WWII - feedback requested
« Reply #2 on: January 24, 2011, 07:00:07 PM »
before we saw the tank detatchment rules you (Tom) was the only person in the group who even wanted to play with vehicles. and i am still yet to read the finalised rules in basra but owen and i have talked about playing tank games against each other


the game feels like a complete game, without tanks and vehicles we prefered the game of foot-slogging soldiers


it just seems that if only one person has or wants a vehicle, that person has the upperhand. the person without the vehicle firstly needs to tailor his force to play against them but also has to do nothing but attack the vehicle until its taken out or (more likely) routed from the table


i am struggling to remember the rules as its been a long time since ive played. maybe its seemed harder because at the time we still hadnt read/played the grenade scatters rules properly and i know we still getting the crew rules wrong but it seemed like luck was the only factor against vehicles.


i had to throw my entire force against your vehicle, ignoring the rest of your force, whilst you could take me apart at your lesuire, complete your objectives and be in my face from the get go


that is really the main reason i dont like them. your vehicle forces me to play a certain way


and the thing is, even if i take out your vehicle you havent really lost anything because most likely the crew would be jumping out and your still a selection above me. if i dont like vehicles but you do and as you say "can use them as they are part of the rules" i'm actually loosing out by playing without them. it almost feels like we're playing 1500pts 40k and you get a free "land raider"
"it's the bones what make 'em crunchy"

Offline Cilionelle

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Это не моя осьминог
Re: Vehicles in AE-WWII - feedback requested
« Reply #3 on: January 25, 2011, 11:55:57 AM »
My thoughts on this are reasonably random, but otherwise cogent...

They're too powerful. When the veichle is destroyed the crew is fine. So you're getting a free crew + armoured beast.

Plus being able to move, then shoot, then move, then shoot and stuff is a bit wang.

I think the game works better without the tanks and just some good old foot sloggin' love.
The crew being fine rule was one that we were doing wrong, I think. 

Quote from: OTW-16
Destroyed Vehicles: A tank or vehicle that is reduced to zero wounds is destroyed, but it is not removed from the table. The vehicle or tank remains on the board and becomes an obstacle. However, the obstacle is potentially dangerous.  Roll a 1d6 once on the table below to determine what happens to the wreck.
1) Explodes - At the end of the turn, the vehicle explodes, killing all crew and passengers still inside of it. All models within 3" of the vehicle take 6+d6 damage. Afterwards the wrecked model, and any models within 6 inches of it, are covered in Smoke for d6 game turns. (all models within 6" of the wreck are covered by smoke and thus take additional cover and RC penalties).
2-3) Smoldering Wreck - The model is covered in smoke for the remainder of the game (all models within 6" of the wreck are covered by smoke and thus take addition cover and RC penalties). At the end of each turn roll a d6. On a 1 there is an ammo explosion. All models within 6" of the vehicle takes 3+d6 damage (No Cover).
4-6) Wrecked Vehicle - The vehicle is left where it stands. No further effects.
We never did that...

The main rule book says that once the vehicle is destroyed, the crew and passengers must disembark on their next activation, which I agree is a little too weighted in the vehicle player's favour.

The Battle Challenge was before the Tank Detachment rules came out.  I don't know if they've changed from that in the Basra book - maybe psycho can enlighten us?

Essentially, dealing with a tank was like dealing with a Mechanic/Buffalo combo.  My armoured car in the games that we did play were only A 8, like the Buffalo.  A Buffalo with M1919s and a Mechanic to buff them had more of a chance of destroying a detachment, apart from the movement issues (but with no Handling stat to worry about).

Page 34 of the OTW quoted above has some good tips for attacking and destroying tanks.

Re: the tactics of taking out tanks, if you're used to playing vs. foot sloggers, then you tailor your list to take foot sloggers out, with snipers or CC monsters, etc.  That has to change with vehicles, and in one sense, I would have to change my list if I was facing AT stuff every time.  The Panzerschrek in the hands of an Unstoppable Rohlingsoldat is deadly to my shiny tank or armoured car, simply because it does 8+2d6 damage... that's a range of 10-20, with my armour being only 8.  In addition, the OTW-16 marks it as Armour Piercing, so any time it hits, it's doing damage, and even on a roll of 6 for my armour save, it is potentially doing 2+ wounds 36% of the time.  And that's with me rolling a 6!
Thanks to denial, Carson's no longer immortal.

Offline carson

  • El Presidente
  • Hero Member
  • *****
Re: Vehicles in AE-WWII - feedback requested
« Reply #4 on: January 25, 2011, 12:46:10 PM »
The difference between a buffalo and mechanic and a armoured veichle is huge.

You take two slots for the buffalo/mechanic combo, the buffalo is slow and only has it's APs, and while yes it is tough, the fact it's slow, doesn't have a huge pool of AP balances it out. A armoured vehicle is fast, armoured, tough AND gets the AP benifits of 3 guys. So it can move, shoot, move, shoot, etc for one slot.

I am adament the game is much more fun and balanced without veichles.

Offline psychomanicd

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • please don't hesitate... to ask someone else first
Re: Vehicles in AE-WWII - feedback requested
« Reply #5 on: January 25, 2011, 01:13:58 PM »
my head is alot clearer today so i wont ramble as much

you have to remember that alot of the anti-tank/vehicle sentiment is from pre-otw 16. back then we were all still trying to figure out the rules and you were the only person wanting to take vehicles.

also taking the buffalo/mechanic takes up 2 slots, your armoured car takes up 1. and that is 1 slot that im not using. the fact is that having the vehicles as part of almost every detachment makes the game unbalanced toward the players that want to use a command detachment but not take a vehicle.

i still dont have basra so i cant comment on rule changes

"it's the bones what make 'em crunchy"

Offline Cilionelle

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Это не моя осьминог
Re: Vehicles in AE-WWII - feedback requested
« Reply #6 on: January 26, 2011, 12:04:41 AM »
Actually, you can only get the armoured car by sacrificing one of your options, in other words, a slot in the detachment.

I wanna do a quick comparison...

E - OSS Agent
V - Mechanic (Archaelogist)
V - Buffalo (M1919)
V - US Airborne Officer
R - US Airborne HWT (pick a weapon)
R - Airborne squad w/BAR, w/rifle grenades (the other)
R - sacrificed to upgrade a Regular slot to Veteran

That's a Vet detachment. I'm aiming for something comparable to what I'd take but without vehicles.

Here's a Command detachment.  This is something I'd take!

E - OSS Agent (Assassin)
V - US Airborne Officer (Warhero)
V - US Airborne HWT (pick a weapon)
R - US Airborne squad w/BAR, w/rifle grenades (the other)
R - sacrificed to upgrade the vehicle to Medium
Vehicle: M20 Armoured Car

The main difference is speed (for the vehicle) and shots (for the Buffalo). The M20 can move 27" in an activation through sprinting (straight line, or with turns and handling checks), no shots, or 18" with two lots of shots fired (6 shots total). The Buffalo with 2AP from the Mechanic can move 10", no shots, but if stationary, can fire five times (15 shots total). The secondary difference in the lists is the Hero choices available. I wouldn't necessarily take Archaelogist, but it seems like a good way to keep the Mechanic alive!

I'm not sure why you'd take a Command detachment without a vehicle, though, Carson.  It would be like taking a Motorised detachment without the truck, I think.  Can you give me an example?
Thanks to denial, Carson's no longer immortal.

Offline psychomanicd

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • please don't hesitate... to ask someone else first
Re: Vehicles in AE-WWII - feedback requested
« Reply #7 on: January 26, 2011, 11:35:50 AM »
i use the command detachment all the time, i use it because it comes with 2 heroes and 2 special orders as standard and 2 options if i really feel like playing with a 3 man crew with 5 special orders (eccentric millionaire ftw!)

the gun on the car has an extra 6" range and +1 str over the buffalo

its the speed thats the main factor. you can ignore the buffalo, you cant ignore a vehicle
"it's the bones what make 'em crunchy"

Offline Cilionelle

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Это не моя осьминог
Re: Vehicles in AE-WWII - feedback requested
« Reply #8 on: January 26, 2011, 03:27:27 PM »
So, then, do you reckon the changes in the OTW sort out some of the issues?
Thanks to denial, Carson's no longer immortal.

Offline kalan1

  • Full Member
  • ***
Re: Vehicles in AE-WWII - feedback requested
« Reply #9 on: January 26, 2011, 07:41:37 PM »
personally if i were to modify the rules i would change the vehicle getting all the AP from occuapnts, instead it should only get the highest or a set number based on type of vehicle