Bienvenue visiteur, pour poster sur ce forum vous devez vous enregistrer.
Flux RSS MembresRecherche
Pages : 1 2 3
Balance issues? 1 best build
Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [27/06/2014] à 11:57

Hi

I have played alot games by now and enjoying it a lot. but…

We have tried building our own armies and I think there might be some balance/motivation isues in what to take.


One tend to maximise the amount of order tokens.

Take the heros who come with Autonomous or Stars.

Take Tanks becuase they get most out of an ordertoken. 2 Shoots( 2 weapons) or move and fire with a small penalty.

There is no real motivation to take infantery or light vehicles over Tanks other the minimum for takeing or hold objectives.


Am I missing something?

Need to tell, that I am a competative player who play tabletop turnaments (warmachine), so the solution, that one need to play this game casualy is not an option:)

I want this game to have a fun, balanced and creative armybuilding, where there is not one bedst build.

But at the moment I think that there is a problem in the power of tanks "duoble" action and the reward for having maximum order tokens and the verry powerfull "Autonomous" skill.


Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [27/06/2014] à 12:26

To my eyes, starting the game with free scenarios is a bad idea…

You and your opponent must have some experience in the game to build his own army…

Many "small" options can balance AFV….

In the game they cannot fire with their heavy gun in movement and can be seen as light tank when moving…

For infantry balance against them, see the opportunity to have many troops regarding their costs with panzerfaust or bazooka….and you will see that tanks are not very strong against such gears….(fire by side or back)

To make sure some fire, give them some traits like veteran or other (reroll dice)…

In other part remember that vehicles cann't take bonus tactics neither have ZoC…

If you play objectives (not ennemy destruction)then i think that AFV can be balanced regarding their costs by infantry in number with good gears or traits..

This depends also on terrain and covers of your map…


« Il ne sert à rien de faire de son mieux; la réussite c’est faire ce qui est nécessaire ». W.Churchill http://lesvieuxdelavieille.org ou http://www.facebook.com/jeanluc.bernard.50

Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [27/06/2014] à 13:18

When playing our 1st open scenario we had similar feelings.


1. Tanks, very powerfull, 2 shots, very hard to hit, could take multiple shots to eliminate.


2. Heroes, some looks superpowerfull, some are just ok. I can't image not taking Oddball or Clint. Rock on the other hand is just meh. He has 7 defense, but with right card, opponent can take him out very easly.


3. Due to the fact that you want maximize order count, it's better to take more recruitment tiles than to use recrutiment options.


For example:


US, I want 6 infantry teams (2xFire,3xBazooka,1xHMG), it's better to split that between 3 recruitment tiles, 2 teams each, than 2 rec.tile, 3 teams each.


For only 20 more points, you get an officer and 3 extra orders. That's rather easy choice.


4. Light vehicles, we also had doubts here.


Let's look at Puma and Greyhound:

-Both have only 1 weapon / attack. Tanks have 2.

-They are vulnerable toalmost any Infantry, LV and HV. Tanks are vulnerable only to other Tanks and specific anti-tank weapons.

-They are more difficult to move because they can't pass sandbags, ruins and wrecks. Tanks can.

-Thay don't get any defense bonus from terrain features. In many situations they are more vulnerable than infantry that's hidden in sandbags, boccage, forest.


When you compare price of Puma (40) to PanzerIV (65) it's also not difficult decision.


I don't mind transport vehicles, mobile mortar, etc. because they have other purpose. But for ordinary combat, it looks like light vehicles department got a short end of stick 🙁


5. Small tanks, PanzerII and Stuart.


Thay are only 10 or 15 points cheaper than bigger cousins, but drop in stats is quite dramatic. Both lose most of anti-tank power and a lot of defense.

In case of Stuart/Sherman, maybe it's resonable. But difference between PanzerII/PanzerIV is simply dramatic.


It looks like light vehicles and small tanks, just get overshadowed by Sherman and PanzerIV. In base game it's propably OK, you only have 2 big tanks per side, so you can take LV or Small tank if you want more fast and fire on the move units. But with army boxes and expansions both armies have access to 6-10 strong tanks, I don't see a place on battlefield for units like Greyhound or Stuart.


Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [27/06/2014] à 14:33

The only problem I see with tanks is that only few units can try to kill them and you have to use an equipment slot for extra weapons against them with the others. To balance things I'd like to let inf units do assault on tanks even if they have X against them, this is more realistic too (tanks needed inf to protect them from enemy inf too near): give a little chance instead of none will reduce the frustration of automatically lose against such armies (and the freedom to chose an army without be forced to field tanks-anti tanks stuff)


Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [27/06/2014] à 17:30

A tank heavy force will struggle amongst boccage and buildings where infantry can have some cover from them and the tanks cannot pass, especially if they get stuck in their own traffic jam.

A shot from a piercing weapon has a 33% chance of destroying a tank outright once it gets past the armour, and any other result seriously reduces the effectiveness of the tank. If you get hull damage the first time, then there is a 67% chance of destroying the tank on the second hit! The odds of breaching armour are pretty good as the tank cannot hide in cover, whereas infantry in boccage have a to-hit of 6 to 8 which is as good as any tank armour. A single infantry unit as good as a tank you say? I wonder what the points difference is between the two?


So my advice for responding to a tank heavy force would be to have a couple of bazooka/panzershrek units, with some additional rockets as an option (particularly on a command board so that they are available to the whole army). Add a couple of special order tokens to your lightweight force, lurk in the hedgerow, and enjoy the look on your opponent's face as you explode 400pts worth of his army in the first couple of rounds 😈

Besides, anyone who has played the scenario where the US have to run their tanks through German territory and off the far side will know that infantry can handle a tank assault in this game 😉


Regarding order tokens, they are indeed valuable as long as you only count them as firing opportunities. Being able to move in the supply phase is often more valuable than giving a unit a direct order so I am now coming round to the belief that there is a practical limit on the number of order tokens that it is useful to have. If you have op fire emplacements, or field units that have it as a special ability, then you certainly don't want to load up too heavily on order tokens. I am leaning more toward directives as being better value at the moment as they can super power troops without having to rely on card draws (or being vulnerable to a 'no' card)

If your opponent spends their points on amassing a ton of order tokens then play the guerilla game with them, lurking behind cover and only exposing a small part of your force at any one time. They will find that many of their order tokens are useless and are being used to move units which could have been done for free in the supply phase (and is more dangerous if you have op fire on them)


Heroes are great, and why not field them seeing as this game is called Heroes of Normandie? Two things to bear in mind though; with some heroes you have to have a certain platoon in play first, and the three regular units you would otherwise have in play for the same cost are still enough to take out a hero in one turn.


edit: as for light vehicles and cheap tanks, it can be useful to have something cheap and maneuverable. Suppressive fire an infantry unit and run a vehicle right over them, use the vehicle to block a passage or LOS, or use it in a flanking maneuvre as a distraction. They are often powerful enough to worry your opponent but cheap enough to isolate and put at risk in a way you wouldn't with a bigger tank. I guess that what I am getting at is that a lot depends on what type of army you are trying to build and everything has it's uses.


Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [27/06/2014] à 17:33

… and can I just say I LOVE THIS GAME.


Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [27/06/2014] à 22:55

Quote from Mezike on [27/06/2014] à 17:30

A tank heavy force will struggle amongst boccage and buildings where infantry can have some cover from them and the tanks cannot pass, especially if they get stuck in their own traffic jam.

A shot from a piercing weapon has a 33% chance of destroying a tank outright once it gets past the armour, and any other result seriously reduces the effectiveness of the tank. If you get hull damage the first time, then there is a 67% chance of destroying the tank on the second hit! The odds of breaching armour are pretty good as the tank cannot hide in cover, whereas infantry in boccage have a to-hit of 6 to 8 which is as good as any tank armour. A single infantry unit as good as a tank you say? I wonder what the points difference is between the two?


So my advice for responding to a tank heavy force would be to have a couple of bazooka/panzershrek units, with some additional rockets as an option (particularly on a command board so that they are available to the whole army). Add a couple of special order tokens to your lightweight force, lurk in the hedgerow, and enjoy the look on your opponent's face as you explode 400pts worth of his army in the first couple of rounds 😈

Besides, anyone who has played the scenario where the US have to run their tanks through German territory and off the far side will know that infantry can handle a tank assault in this game 😉


Regarding order tokens, they are indeed valuable as long as you only count them as firing opportunities. Being able to move in the supply phase is often more valuable than giving a unit a direct order so I am now coming round to the belief that there is a practical limit on the number of order tokens that it is useful to have. If you have op fire emplacements, or field units that have it as a special ability, then you certainly don't want to load up too heavily on order tokens. I am leaning more toward directives as being better value at the moment as they can super power troops without having to rely on card draws (or being vulnerable to a 'no' card)

If your opponent spends their points on amassing a ton of order tokens then play the guerilla game with them, lurking behind cover and only exposing a small part of your force at any one time. They will find that many of their order tokens are useless and are being used to move units which could have been done for free in the supply phase (and is more dangerous if you have op fire on them)


Heroes are great, and why not field them seeing as this game is called Heroes of Normandie? Two things to bear in mind though; with some heroes you have to have a certain platoon in play first, and the three regular units you would otherwise have in play for the same cost are still enough to take out a hero in one turn.


edit: as for light vehicles and cheap tanks, it can be useful to have something cheap and maneuverable. Suppressive fire an infantry unit and run a vehicle right over them, use the vehicle to block a passage or LOS, or use it in a flanking maneuvre as a distraction. They are often powerful enough to worry your opponent but cheap enough to isolate and put at risk in a way you wouldn't with a bigger tank. I guess that what I am getting at is that a lot depends on what type of army you are trying to build and everything has it's uses.


I wished your aguments where true, but they are not.

A bazooka needs a 4+ to hit a Panzer IV in the front, then it has a 1/6 chance to kill it. thats about 10% for a kill shot. Thats for one order token and now the bazooka team is revealed.

Panzer IV has longer range, it need a 3+ if bazooka is in cover to hit and kill with its machinegun. thats a 66% chance for a kill shot compared to the 10% of the bazooka.

If panzer IV dont move it get to shoot you with its gun as well.

They cost around the same points. 65


You Also fail to see that having more orders than your opponent is a huge advanged.

I realy wished you where right… maybe over time the rules and balance how unit Works might fix this.


If one lay the scenraios with pre made up armies the designers can make the balance.

But in a open battle where both player pick armies, tanks and many orders >>> inf. armies using guarilla tactics.


Peter


Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [28/06/2014] à 10:16

Peter, I see your reasons and I feel the same, but I'd like clem and yann be here to speak about those things because they play HoN a lot more than us so I know there are reasons about their choices and hear them can help us. We are starting to know how HoN works so we could miss some points, have the creators help with that could be a good thing 🙂


Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [28/06/2014] à 14:14

Rodler I think you missread what Mezike wrote about the destruction of a Tank.


A shot from a piercing weapon has a 33% chance of destroying a tank outright once it gets past the armour


He is absolutly right about it.


Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [28/06/2014] à 14:35

I just played a game with a lot of tanks vs infantry with lots of orders and some bazookas, well the problem is there, you have to provide some anti tank option in every army or you are screwed. The best option seems to give anti tank equip so every inf units can use them, but you have only a limited number of try and you have to relay on dice even for that and, as said, think of build your army with a base of anti tank equip or units limits the freedom.


Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [28/06/2014] à 19:10

Although I am not disagreeing with the discussion about having to keep armor in mind, I would like to bring up the fact that such was the reality of the WWII battlefield. Tanks were a significant factor and need to be accounted for in your TOE decisions.


It is definitely true that factors such as fuel (Battle of the Bulge anyone?) or availability are not really taken into account by the game, so commanders can feel free to purchase armor as they like.


I too am curious what Clem and Yann think about armor.


But having the most orders does not guarantee a win. I played Slaughterhouse (5) against a friend and he had the Germans. The first two objective markers he flipped were extra orders, but I still managed to win the game, thanks to a strategically placed tank 🙂


Edit to add: Autonomous ability does seem pretty powerful, since it not only gives you an extra fire action, but you can choose when use it.


Volunteer Moderator of the English Language Forums
Remember: If you are not willing to shell your own position you are not willing to win!

Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [28/06/2014] à 19:43

Quote from Nostradunwhich on [28/06/2014] à 19:10

Although I am not disagreeing with the discussion about having to keep armor in mind, I would like to bring up the fact that such was the reality of the WWII battlefield.


You are right, but if we talk about WW2, one of the tank weakness was infantry in contact with it in fact they were always escorted by other infantry units or had short range weapons to clear them. If tanks were so good in WW2 as in HoN probably we saw only tanks 🙂

So, wait for clem and yann words about this balance issue, probably we missed something 🙂


Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [29/06/2014] à 00:52

Quote from Rodler on [27/06/2014] à 22:55

They cost around the same points. 65


Nope. For example, the Weapons platoon costs 55 points and you get four units (Bazooka, Officer, Mortar, and a .30cal), and the officer also gives me an order token. A tank on it's own does not get an order token, and for the 10 points difference I get to buy some rocket grenades, or a little extra gets me an ammo bearer to give my bazooka an extra life. Or I can spend 30 points on TWO additional bazookas, which prices them at 15 points each and not quite the 65pts you claim above 😉


The main weapon on the Panzer is largely useless against infantry that are in defensive positions so the double fire is not that impressive. Anyway, as soon as I get my first hit (with a 50-50 chance of passing the armour) you will lose the benefit of that double fire. As Creed mentioned, you are not taking into account the Piercing ability and the first hit pretty much disables your tank; 2 in 6 destruction, 2 in 6 permanently lose one of your guns, and 2 in 6 hull damage.


For the cost of only two Panzers I can put out six infantry including three bazookas, supported with an ammo bearer and a Trigger Happy .30cal laying down suppression, and still have enough points left to buy a battle plan which gives me the order advantage every round (not that I could put that option into the Weapons Platoon but you get my drift), or I could make them veterans to increases my chances of a one-shot, and heroic as well so that one Bazooka could likely destroy both tanks on the first activation 😯 So no, tanks are not always superior. And the Germans also have it even easier as the Panzershrek are better than Bazooka, not to mention Helmut and his endless supply of them.

Of course, you would be better off spending the 130 pts on the Panzergruppe in which case I wouldn't say that one side is better than the other, I would say that they are well matched as those Bazookas are going to have to work a lot harder than they would against the Panzers. That's where you, as their commander, make the difference.

A case in point here is the tank scenario in the base game (I forget the name) where the Germans have only infantry and a single cannon against a wave of US tanks, and yet it is far from a walkover for the Americans. I would say that everything has it's place, and in most games you need a balanced force if you are to succeed.


On another note that you raise, range is pointless in this game unless you are playing in completely open terrain, which is unlikely. I have only ever had a shot at greater than range seven twice; once on the first activation of a beach landing and another in that tank scenario from the base game. If there are large open spaces then I am sure as hell not going to put my Bazookas out in the open for you, I will keep them under cover and make you come to me.


With all due respect I think that you are overplaying the importance of orders. They are only ever more useful than supply phase movement if you are using them for firing or assault and sometimes safely moving a unit is more important than activating it for combat. And sometimes your opponent is being really annoying and not putting all his units into open spaces that allow you to use all eight of your order tokens to shoot at him. Or he strafes your line with suppressive fire and flicks V-signs at you as you fail dice roll after roll. All of which are situations that I have been in before 😆

In such instances you would have been better off buying something that gave you a bonus/trait, equipment, or an extra unit instead. I still usually buy an extra order because they are so cheap but they are not the be-all and end-all of army building. This is my opinion, it's not the same as yours, but I am hardly a noob at this game and it's a considered opinion rather than a failure to see something obvious. Right now I am experimenting more with Directives as I think that these can create really pivotal moments which swing the advantage of the game, and that is something that I believe is more valuable than half a dozen activations, some or even most of which won't add any value.


Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [29/06/2014] à 09:27

I'm not experienced enough with the game yet but interesting points and observations folks.


Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [29/06/2014] à 19:58

Quote from Dassenkop on [29/06/2014] à 09:27

interesting points and observations folks.


Indeed! My thanks to everyone for a very enlightening discussion.


I am going to have to experiment with some of this as soon as possible.


Special thanks to Mezike for the detailed analysis of infantry.


Volunteer Moderator of the English Language Forums
Remember: If you are not willing to shell your own position you are not willing to win!

Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [30/06/2014] à 07:35

I'll throw in my 2 cents.


We've been playing mostly 4 player games (even before the official rules for it were released), and with custom scenarios with anything from 400p to 700p per side. With map sizes like 2×2, 2×3 and even 2×4 for the 700p game.


During the first couple of games, we thought the mortar teams were extremely powerful, able to fire to any interspace on the map, with minimal predetermined scatter. But after a few games, they started to feel balanced to us. They can be really good when the opponent doesn't take them into account, since the players know the distance they scatter, so in a correct space they might be able to score a hit on at least one unit 100% of the time. But when the opponents know about the threat, they can (mostly) be taken into account and make them a lot less effective.


In the following games we have had problems with tanks. If the player with several heavy vehicle units focuses on the units that can hurt heavy vehicles. Then after a while nothing can destroy the tanks. Yes, the players can take anti-tank gear, and anti-tank units and own tanks to counter. But if they don't take a lot of anti-tank options, they can't do anything about the tanks. By a lot I mean that sure, if you have two bazooka units you can try to shoot the tanks down. But if you fail (which is likely) you can bet your ass my entire army will focus them down, and then if you do wound a tank, I took the repair card into my deck.


Personally, I love that tanks are great, but as it stands, with custom scenarios and point building, in our experience you HAVE to take a lot of anti vehicle options other wise you'll lose to the invulnerable tanks. And this means there's less "real" options when building the army.


This might only be a problem since I got all my German units by didn't get the US army box (which includes a heavy vehicle platoon).


The next time we're building our armies for the custom scenarios, we're going to predetermine which recruitment templates both sides can use, and then only build their army by buying options to the predetermined templates. This at least gives both sides an idea what they are going to face.


Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [30/06/2014] à 08:28

I feel the pain with the tanks and I have the same experience of SuperioR, simply it reduces the freedom to chose an army because you HAVE to fill with some anti tank weapons. I am starting to house rule that simply let any inf units with assault icon to launch an assault action against a tank even if it has the X on heavy (it counts only for ranged attacks): after the first plays I can say that it is fun and not so unbalanced because a tank is a beast and, as in WW2, it needs a protection from close assault so you have to be careful when play with them and shield them with your own infantry. I really like to hear some words from Y&C about it 🙂


p.s. I am working on houserule the "0 stars=lose" rule, i always put the units with orders out of play to not lose them, but it's a waste and a non sense in this kind of heroic gameplay. I think a new topic with our houserule could be a great source for improve the game 😀


Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [30/06/2014] à 09:44

Would it be an idea that before both players build their army, they both roll a die to determine how many heavy vehicles they are allowed to add in their army. Something like:

1 – 0 heavy vehicles

2 – 0 heavy vechicles

3 – max 1 heavy vehicle

4 – max 2 heavy vehicles

5 – max 3 heavy vehicles

6 – unlimited heavy vehicles


In this way the other player has an idea of the force he would be up against.


What do you think?


Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [30/06/2014] à 11:28

Quote from SuperioR on [30/06/2014] à 07:35

The next time we're building our armies for the custom scenarios, we're going to predetermine which recruitment templates both sides can use, and then only build their army by buying options to the predetermined templates. This at least gives both sides an idea what they are going to face.


I like this idea very much, as there will still be some 'fog of war' in what your opponent can put into the options. It would seem unlikely that you would not know that you were being sent to take on a tank column and able to send an appropriate force, but you would not necessarily know all the surprises that your opponent has in support.


Balance issues? 1 bedst build posté le [30/06/2014] à 11:48

But even if you have a pool of tiles to chose from, if some tanks will be there you have to take anti tank stuff. Of course , you can chose a pool of tiles without tanks to be sure, if you like this way why not, but even this way it's reduce the freedom of build armies as you wish.


I'd like some game rules changes for this, something that let you play with every army you want without limits, I suggested my solution and seems to work but need much more testing to be sure, this is why I asked y&c to say something about it, they are the only people in the world with enough experience to say if it's good or bad or can explain why tanks are so in HoN 🙂


Pages : 1 2 3