logo

All times are UTC - 6 hours

Mark forums read


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 176 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Floor Rules Update Coming! - Your chance for input
PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 10:32 pm 
Mandalore
Mandalore
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 7:43 pm
Posts: 1009
Location: Southern Illinois
NickName wrote:
Lightsaber attacks should count as melee attacks. It's not like the errata would be convoluted, lengthy, or hard to understand for gameplay purposes, so why not?

Gha Natch shouldn't affect Mouse Droids. It's not like the errata would be convoluted, lengthy, or hard to understand for gameplay purposes, so why not?

Jedi should be able to destroy a door with their lightsaber. It's not like the errata would be convoluted, lengthy, or hard to understand for gameplay purposes, so why not?


Ok, the lightsaber youve got me on, and I will concede the point, but I dont feel either of the others are vaild arguements.

Gha doesnt work because you are are talking about altering an existing ability as it applies to one single character. If you wanted to say that Rapport itself cannot lower the cost of any single piece to lower than 3pts, that would be closer, but you are still errating an ability altogether, which isnt what this would be doing. This is effectively the same thing as WOTC forgetting to put the ability on the card.

The jedi blowing upen a door with their sabers is an entirely different can of worms than either of the others, cause you are inventing an entirely new rule with that one, and while I do agree it makes sense, we all know logic holds no water in the world of SWM. Just ask Chewbacca and Tarfful, the giant Ewoks :Ewok:

But yes, I do see your point.

_________________
WotC: 890/890
V-Set: 142/142

Wotc GTL: 52ish
Gamers GTL: 2 (dalsiandon, urbanjedi)

fingersandteeth wrote:
Also t4 for override and a cheeky flame.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Floor Rules Update Coming! - Your chance for input
PostPosted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 11:56 am 
Death Star Designers
Death Star Designers
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 9:45 pm
Posts: 3886
I don't see anything "good" about errata to things that aren't needed. Errata is used to fix something that is not working as intended (Ysalimari) or to fix something that is breaking the game (Soresu Style Mastery). It is not there to fix pieces that were not made bad pieces or to make the game more "realistic". Adding Stable Footing does NOTHING for the game, it only makes it more difficult for someone to jump into a sanctioned game. Between Gambit, One activation, and already two changes to cards as printed makes it somewhat painful for new players. Such errata should only be used when something is breaking the game.

_________________
Bloomilk Ambassador


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Floor Rules Update Coming! - Your chance for input
PostPosted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 8:44 am 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 2:46 pm
Posts: 7960
Location: West Chester, OH (near Cincinnati)
Guys....remember....the purpose of the Floor Rules has always been to direct the Tournament play of the game, not the RULES of the game. There are VERY limited changes in the Floor rules to address massive imbalance problems, and they are limited to very few things. Honestly, I don't really agree with Huges losing Rigid via the Floor Rules, since it really isn't a balance issue. As NickName pointed out, they aren't any better not having Rigid than they were before. But it was better to do it that way than to have to fuss so much with the Maps.

Any 'errata' in the Floor Rules, should only be there for things that are truly broken. These are just the rules for competitive level play, and now that Organized Play doesn't really exist on an LGS level, these Floor Rules than are really only for large events like Conventions, Regionals, and GenCon. So, people can do whatever the heck they want to at their local levels. Give Huges Flight for all the rest of us care, so long as everyone in your play group agrees. Let Jedi spend a FP to blow up doors. Ban Mouse Droids altogether if you need to. Whatever it is.

So, try to look at the Floor Rules as ONLY affecting the Regionals and GenCon Championship next year. Is it worth making the change to Huges just for that? No, I don't think so. Because it will have no impact on the game at that level.

This thread was started mainly to make sure that there weren't any issues with the Tournament Rules, not the game's rules. So, are there problems with the scoring system, the map list, the rules for proxies, stuff like that. I think the problem is that, outside of discussing maps, there really isn't much this year to discuss otherwise, so we're looking for things to change. If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

_________________
-Aaron
Mand'alor
"You either die a hero, or you live to see yourself become the villain."
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Floor Rules Update Coming! - Your chance for input
PostPosted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 11:09 am 
Hall of Fame Member
Hall of Fame Member

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 11:43 am
Posts: 1163
Location: Fremont, CA
LoboStele wrote:
Honestly, I don't really agree with Huges losing Rigid via the Floor Rules, since it really isn't a balance issue. As NickName pointed out, they aren't any better not having Rigid than they were before. But it was better to do it that way than to have to fuss so much with the Maps.


The origins of this one are pretty clearly a game-design issue. For those unaware, the original Rigid rule applied just to sealed. The problem was, through random chance you could pull a huge piece, and end up on a map/side that prevented your huge piece from ever exiting your starting area since the original selection of maps were never designed with the thought of huge characters existing at all.

For constructed, there was a decision made to resolve it in a different way, by allowing a certain format, specifically 200, to only have maps that would not have a problem with huges getting out of the starting area and travering the length of it, if not every single nook.

Over time however, the huges weren't getting played. 200 had become popular, not as a format to use huges, but as a general format. And so the limitations on maps were eventually a detriment to cater to characters that weren't ever being played at all for other reasons.

Flash forward to a the last update to the floor rules where we wanted to rethink maps from the ground up as had been discussed for a long time prior. There was only one really problematic aspect to that, and that was introducing the sealed "locked in the start" problem back into contructed for huges. It was decided that it was easiest, and more consistent to just have one rule for all formats to solve it and the greater good was getting map variety and balance issues resolved.

_________________


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Floor Rules Update Coming! - Your chance for input
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2010 3:54 pm 
Death Star Designers
Death Star Designers
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 7:29 am
Posts: 730
Location: Kokomo, Indiana
Tony Mullins from Kokomo was playing one of the Michigan guys and attempting to go to 4-2 in the championships. He was running a NR squad with Dodonna (naturally) and was holed up in gambit by the end of round one. His opponent was running Rebels with Luke Push, Reiken, and many shooters Han, Leia (free attack), etc. His opponent called over a judge to warn Tony about slow play because he wouldn't engage (never mind he would not either...his opponent was not in gambit). Tony had pressed the action to get to the center and was warned he needed to engage...again his opponent would not advance. The two had many heated words and Tony because of his warning for slow play exited and engaged only to be shot up when his evades failed. He felt the warning was unjustified and was really ticked at his opponent. My game had ended and I was watching from behind so I know this occurred. He felt perhaps his opponent was accorded a privaleged status because he was a regional winner and felt perhaps (I disagree) the judge he had beaten twice earlier in the weekend had a grudge and ruled against him. The slow play issue even when spelled out as it was by the judges seems difficult to judge on occasion and is open to many possible discrepencies.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Floor Rules Update Coming! - Your chance for input
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2010 5:09 pm 
The One True Sith Lord
The One True Sith Lord
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:12 pm
Posts: 2026
Location: Nixa,Missouri
WacoBlaze wrote:
Tony Mullins from Kokomo was playing one of the Michigan guys and attempting to go to 4-2 in the championships. He was running a NR squad with Dodonna (naturally) and was holed up in gambit by the end of round one. His opponent was running Rebels with Luke Push, Reiken, and many shooters Han, Leia (free attack), etc. His opponent called over a judge to warn Tony about slow play because he wouldn't engage (never mind he would not either...his opponent was not in gambit). Tony had pressed the action to get to the center and was warned he needed to engage...again his opponent would not advance. The two had many heated words and Tony because of his warning for slow play exited and engaged only to be shot up when his evades failed. He felt the warning was unjustified and was really ticked at his opponent. My game had ended and I was watching from behind so I know this occurred. He felt perhaps his opponent was accorded a privaleged status because he was a regional winner and felt perhaps (I disagree) the judge he had beaten twice earlier in the weekend had a grudge and ruled against him. The slow play issue even when spelled out as it was by the judges seems difficult to judge on occasion and is open to many possible discrepencies.


So for one slow play warning given out you are going to accuse me and the entire judging team of dishonesty?

Saying that a player recieved privledged status and that a judge was mad at a player really is kind of just saying that the whole championship was rigged.

As the organizer of the event, the person who selected the judges and defined the play expectations I really dont like the way you have worded this paragraph. Basically it just reads like a huge slap in the face to me.

Anytime a judge is called to make a decision I can tell you one person is not going to be happy about what the judge says. That is just the way things go anytime you have someone with the title of JUDGE. But to say things were slanted because you disagreed with a decision is just bad form. No special considerations were given to any player. Hell if we were going to do that I would have just claimed the Championship as my own. Anytime stuff like that is said maybe you dont see the cause and effect of the statement but it is huge.

It makes the organizer look bad. The judges look bad and it cheapens the championship for the person that won it. Because maybe someone who is not really informed thinks that Daniel had a judges help to win the championship.

_________________
ImageImage
"What is your bidding, My Master?"

Collection: 934/934

SWM DCI Content Manager


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Floor Rules Update Coming! - Your chance for input
PostPosted: Wed Dec 01, 2010 9:40 am 
Major Tierce
Major Tierce

Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 11:21 pm
Posts: 3163
Waco

Not sure why you (or anyone is bringing this up 3+ month's after the fact). I don't recall seeing anything about this at the time of right after Gencon. I certainly remember years past where something happened and it was all over the boards right after Gencon. Also your post has errors. I was the only MI guy who won a regional and I did not play Tony Mullins and certainly wasn't playing rebels. I was 4-1 getting beaten by Trevor in the last round. Not sure who your friend played, but it certainly wasn't a MI guy who was a regional winner. Also not sure how your game could have been over before they even finished rd 1 as you say he was in gambit rd one and also claim that your game was over and you watched over his shoulder. Sounds like time has possibly blurred the memory a little.

Also (esp if your friend was in gambit and his opp wasn't) it sounds like your friend was in line to win the game anyway. Now if your friend needed a 3 pt win well then he should be prepared to engage (whether his opp is or not) to make sure he can reach 200 pts in the time limit. I know a few players had that problem with having good records but squads that struggled in certain matchups to make it to 200 pts. Eventual winner Daniel had that problem needing a 3 pt win in the last rd to make it to T8 with a 5-1 record (and he played super aggressive and beat his opp for a 3 pt win to make it in on 12pts).

_________________
When I left you I was but the learner . . . now I am the master.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Floor Rules Update Coming! - Your chance for input
PostPosted: Wed Dec 01, 2010 12:53 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 2:46 pm
Posts: 7960
Location: West Chester, OH (near Cincinnati)
My guess is that he was playing Jew3, who won 2 Regionals in 2009, but not in 2010, as I think he was the only one with a Rebel Push squad in the Championships this year.

I 100% agree here though...3+ after the fact is NOT the time to bring this up. If your friend was concerned about the fairness of the warning, then you should have called the other judge over to discuss it. Or, if your friend was ahead on points due to gambit, then he had no reason to engage at all, and your friend should have been calling the judge over in order to give the opponent a slow play warning. If your friend was ahead on points due to gambit, then it was the other player who was playing slow. However, sometimes that kind of ruling can come down to who called the judge over first. Without knowing the exact specifics of the game, I would guess that your friend needed 3 points in order to have a shot at going to the top.

As it stands, I went back and looked at the final standings from the tournament, and Tony finished 3-2 with only 7 points. So that means he didn't even play his final game. In addition, even if he had played the final game, he couldn't have scored enough points to make it in the top 8 anyways, as he obviously had two 2-point wins and only one 3-point win. Only one person in the Top 8 had two 2-point wins, and that was Daniel Stephens. And the only reason he still got into the Top 8 was because he went 5-1. So, regardless of this one particular game, it would've been pretty tough for Tony to have made the Top 8 anyways. Sounded like his tactic for winning this particular game was to camp in gambit and make the opponent come to him. That used to work under the old rule set, but it's really no longer viable with the 3/2/0 scoring system. It typically doesn't give you enough time to get the full victory if you spend 2-3 rounds camping in gambit first.

_________________
-Aaron
Mand'alor
"You either die a hero, or you live to see yourself become the villain."
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Floor Rules Update Coming! - Your chance for input
PostPosted: Wed Dec 01, 2010 4:59 pm 
Death Star Designers
Death Star Designers
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 7:29 am
Posts: 730
Location: Kokomo, Indiana
No no no. I am not complaining, I had nary a problem in any of my games at GenCon (something like 26 or 27 games). I merely relayed the narrative as to not be telling something I had heard (heresay) but something I had witnessed. It was my friend and not I, and I was merely relaying the story to illustrate how difficult it is to rule on slow play. Perhaps I should not have listed his name but it was merely to authenticate my story (again no heresay). I was merely expounding on the issue of slow play. He hasn't spoken of it since the day it happened and it was over for him after that day.

We all remember Bill talking with the entire group about slow play and the example I relayed only proves how slow play warnings are often confusing for some if they feel they were not playing that way. I totally agree about 17 + mini squads going one at a time (Vader Swap, Lancer, and countless Dodonna squads...glad there will finally be some counters) and the player not moving quickly and stalling until their "big" move. I played a Lancer squad at a Regional and we only played 3 rounds (very slow play on his behalf) and he won on a last move (after time was up) and strafe...very frustrating.

Basically I was merely talking about slow play and that is it, this is not a GenCon bashing thread it was merely the last competitive tournament I played at.
* Thanks Lobo for looking that information up. He indeed had 2 point victories and did not know if he would/could make it to top 8 or not he merely wanted a win against a good player and one he thought he could beat in their particular matchup. Also, my bad on this post and its timing. I did not even look at when the first page threads were entered and I assumed they were current.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Floor Rules Update Coming! - Your chance for input
PostPosted: Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:37 pm 
The One True Sith Lord
The One True Sith Lord
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:12 pm
Posts: 2026
Location: Nixa,Missouri
WacoBlaze wrote:
No no no. I am not complaining, I had nary a problem in any of my games at GenCon (something like 26 or 27 games). I merely relayed the narrative as to not be telling something I had heard (heresay) but something I had witnessed. It was my friend and not I, and I was merely relaying the story to illustrate how difficult it is to rule on slow play. Perhaps I should not have listed his name but it was merely to authenticate my story (again no heresay). I was merely expounding on the issue of slow play. He hasn't spoken of it since the day it happened and it was over for him after that day.

We all remember Bill talking with the entire group about slow play and the example I relayed only proves how slow play warnings are often confusing for some if they feel they were not playing that way. I totally agree about 17 + mini squads going one at a time (Vader Swap, Lancer, and countless Dodonna squads...glad there will finally be some counters) and the player not moving quickly and stalling until their "big" move. I played a Lancer squad at a Regional and we only played 3 rounds (very slow play on his behalf) and he won on a last move (after time was up) and strafe...very frustrating.

Basically I was merely talking about slow play and that is it, this is not a GenCon bashing thread it was merely the last competitive tournament I played at.
* Thanks Lobo for looking that information up. He indeed had 2 point victories and did not know if he would/could make it to top 8 or not he merely wanted a win against a good player and one he thought he could beat in their particular matchup. Also, my bad on this post and its timing. I did not even look at when the first page threads were entered and I assumed they were current.



ok good thing and good thing to discuss. It wasnt clear at first. But I can understand what you are saying. Unfortunately we will always have slow play issues. Some people still have grasped what it is or what is does. It was very apparent in a couple of regionals last year. It will be apparent again this year in the Regionals. Thankfully it has gotten better than before which is a step in the right direction.

_________________
ImageImage
"What is your bidding, My Master?"

Collection: 934/934

SWM DCI Content Manager


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Floor Rules Update Coming! - Your chance for input
PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 11:19 pm 
Unnamed Wookiee
Unnamed Wookiee

Joined: Sun May 31, 2009 12:17 pm
Posts: 16
On the subject of custom mini's. Is there any reason to keep the requirement that a SWM or DDM base be used? So long as the base is the right size and shape, and the mini's are easily recognizable, why should we need to cut up our minis?

ETA- Dropping the requirement would allow V-sets to use of things like the AAT transformer on a 4x4 base, without cutting up a very expensive mini.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Floor Rules Update Coming! - Your chance for input
PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 9:20 am 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 2:46 pm
Posts: 7960
Location: West Chester, OH (near Cincinnati)
I don't think it was ever a requirement that it had to be a SWM or DDM base figurine. Just that it was easily recognizable as the appropriate character. Under the old rule set, it was assumed that you had purchased the real figure as well, in order for you to have the associated card to go with it.

_________________
-Aaron
Mand'alor
"You either die a hero, or you live to see yourself become the villain."
Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Floor Rules Update Coming! - Your chance for input
PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:18 am 
Unnamed Wookiee
Unnamed Wookiee
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 10:48 am
Posts: 48
Location: Central Pennsylvania
I would vote for the inclusion of the rules found in the various scenario packs that have been published. For example rules for damaging and moving through windows and rules for destroying and moving through destroyed walls.

I support and vote for the larger models having stable footing. To balance this you might consider not granting cover to the larger models from low objects because their height would only gain cover from something likewise as high like a wall or tree.

I agree and vote for a Combined fire equivalent for Melee.

Some other rules I would like to see:
- Grenades can target an empty square
- Splash/flamethrower attacks can target an empty square
- Increased carrying capacity for the Rebel Troop Cart and Dessert Skiff
- Carrying capacity for, Luke's Speeder, the Rancor, and the X-1 Viper Droid (they carried Rebel squads in "Dark Empire" comics)
- 2 or more adjacent models can carry C-3PO, Ewok Deity
- 2 or more adjacent models can help Mounted Weapon or Heavy Weapon models to move faster
- 4 or more adjacent models can help slow-moving models (Jabba) to move faster (sedan chair)
- Combined fire that can grant +4 to hit AND/OR "damage +10".

For example if 3 Stormtroopers are firing at the same target, one can grant +4 to hit and another can grant +10 damage, such that three models can concentrate fire and not only improve their chances to hit but also their ability to penetrate thick armor (Damage Reduction/Dark Armor) as well.

_________________


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Floor Rules Update Coming! - Your chance for input
PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:10 pm 
Warmaster
Warmaster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 7:14 pm
Posts: 588
Location: Greenfield,In
ia am actualy against the idea of using windows. We have tried it as a house rule before and it makes some maps unballanced. It means that there is no way for one side to hide on a few maps and the other side has plenty of cover.


As to the increased cappacity for the transport units, i believe they are leaving anything wizzards has done as is. they didnt want to change already made miniatures.

and as to the +10 damage idea, that would make spotter useless essentially.

_________________
When Life Gives you Lemons........... Squirt everyone Else in the eyes and steal their fruit.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Floor Rules Update Coming! - Your chance for input
PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:45 pm 
Really Cool Alien from a Cantina
Really Cool Alien from a Cantina
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:38 pm
Posts: 150
Location: Madison, WI
DarthJawa wrote:
and as to the +10 damage idea, that would make spotter useless essentially.


I hope he really meant only "or" as his example showed. "And" would be broken.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: Floor Rules Update Coming! - Your chance for input
PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:54 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:00 pm
Posts: 6547
Location: Southern IL
MandalMauler wrote:
DarthJawa wrote:
and as to the +10 damage idea, that would make spotter useless essentially.


I hope he really meant only "or" as his example showed. "And" would be broken.


I think he meant that one piece combining could give +4att, and another piece combining could give +10d at the same time.

Also, I believe spotter would stack with that.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 176 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

All times are UTC - 6 hours

Mark forums read

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Darth Ruthven and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Jedi Knights style by Scott Stubblefield