Usually when I play test games I look for examples of actions and consequences that defy expectations.
One such instance demonstrated itself in a play test game last week when a PRDF Strike unit of four Warrior IVs airdropped behind the lines of the south army I was testing. I would have expected my opponent to drop in on the Visigoth on my right flank and attempt to take it out but instead the unit was deployed onto my left flank and virtually won the game all by themselves.
Submitted by Dave McLeod on Fri, 03/28/2014 - 5:02pm
The March 14th update of the Alpha rules was swiftly followed by some quick sleuthing by some forum members who rightly pointed out that several models had been left out and there were some glaring mistakes in several files.
The following Army list Files have been revised sufficiently enough to warrant a revision to the March 14th update files. This will allow players to get all the changes in one place without the need to find each and every one themselves: South CEF Black Talons
If there is a true fact about rules updates it is no rules update ever feels like it is ever complete. For early versions this can be an advantage since it means there is still time and space for changes. There are a lot of subtle changes in the March 14th update and some not so subtle ones. The Melee attack options got some work and even some expansion with rules like Crush (for infantry) and Toss (for when you want to move a target but don't want to follow).
Some needed items are as simple as the separation of Split fire from the Burst trait. If the weapon has the Split:X trait you can attack X models with the weapon with one attack option. There is a -1D6 modifier to the secondary targets but it is still a powerful option. Auto cannons with rotating barrels are now in their own category called Rotary Cannons, slightly shorter range but wickedly effective.
Submitted by Dave McLeod on Fri, 03/14/2014 - 8:19pm
In the play test response file there is a list of play test goals and unlike most lists this list starts at zero. Goal zero is: Did you enjoy the game? This is entirely a subjective question. Enjoyment can take many forms. Enjoyment may come from a feeling of satisfaction of mastering the capabilities of your chosen army, from winning against the odds, from coming back from a serious setback to success, or just from making the best of a bad situation.
In comparison there are many reasons not to enjoy a game. Spending too much time checking over complicated rules can drain enjoyment from a game. Playing a game where you have no game position advancing moves you can make,such as a standoff or a force mismatch, can prevent players from enjoying the game experience.
Submitted by Dave McLeod on Fri, 03/07/2014 - 1:59pm
There are several subtle changes to the rules that provide some new options as well as balancing some weapons. In addition several style changes have been implemented and some re-balancing of certain armies (Peace River, CEF, and Black Talons, I'm looking at you!).
More details after the cutoff
Submitted by Dave McLeod on Fri, 02/14/2014 - 1:17am
The Alpha play test is revving up, many players are reading and commenting on the rules and now it’s time to have a quick review of attacking, weapons attributes, and damage effects.
How to resolve an attack in Heavy Gear is not a lot more complicated that making an opposed test for the attack and defender (s). Getting the attack to stick and do damage is going to take some work since the attacker has to fight against the natural defender’s advantage, terrain. There are several ways to improve your odds when attacking.
Submitted by Dave McLeod on Thu, 02/06/2014 - 8:34pm
There is nothing like a new release to get a month started.
I’ve been humbled and impressed by the quality of the responses that have come in to the initial readings and games played. It’s clear we live in a connected world with responses on the forums, e-mail, messages and others. The Heavy Gear Alpha sub-forum will have logged over 350 thread responses by the time I’m done this blog post on Monday AM.
One thing is clear. There’s a lot of interest. Some new faces and some old familiar ones are popping in to help out with their experience and knowledge. The sheer brain power being marshaled means only one thing: People care. It’s the most important thing to remember is that the person on the other side of the conversation also cares about the game and the setting and the little details that make it such a great sandbox to play in. We owe it to each other to debate the points honestly, respectfully, and even bluntly.
Submitted by Dave McLeod on Mon, 02/03/2014 - 1:25am
(This is a continuation of Blog #3) with blog 4 added on.
Solkan is correct in his observation on the forums. “Checks have greater potential for a significant swing in results than Rolls” (paraphrased).
My early alpha play testers figured out a way to get a 15D6 attack check, requiring 6+ actions, and I think that's the best they've managed (and pure theory really. If you managed all those modifiers in game then you've probably already won). When you’ve read the rules see if you can figure out how they did it. The winning answer will get all the internets.
A good rule to remember is: The dice represent the potential of the action, and the result of the test is the actual result of the action.
Submitted by Dave McLeod on Thu, 01/30/2014 - 5:13pm