TheBeninator

No Alpha-nom-nom this time around. I thought I would play a warlord on foot for probably the first time ever. Yay for Infantry!

Sam and I have a date that day. 

5k sounds great. More brave skinks for the cause!

I'm fine with snacking on corsairs. Did you want to play 4.5k of 5k?

Yes! I will be bringing the lizards, as to ensure our armies look as good as the generals . Ill bring an Alpha NomNom-asaur for epic theme.

Yeppers,

Sat the 7th was the plan.

Be there, or be a 4 - equal length sided polygon joined at right angles.

Looking for a match of t9a anywhere in the Portland/Vancouver area. Hoping for 4.5k or 5k points (preferably 5k). I would also be down to demo a game of T9a for anyone who has not already played it before. My preference is a location that also sells beer.

I really appreciate the GURPS system. Here are a few reasons why.

1) Characters are built on points for stats and skills. This is cool because any character can be really whatever you want. If you dont like the linear character development chutes that systems like D&D put you down, then GURPS is awesome. You can dabble in a little bit of everything, or be super specific. The point cost increases during your higher progression in a single skill, so it rewards diversity in your character, which makes for more interesting play imo.

The HUGE improvement I see to it is Advantages/Disadvantages. This is a system by which you choose some perks (like good eyesight, good looks, quit wit, ect.) which cost some of your character development points. Disadvantages are things you can throw on your character (such as hemophobia, alcoholism, blindness) which rewards you with extra points to spend elsewhere. So if you like the idea of a blind monk, then you are rewarded for being blind with a few extra development points, but still have to deal with being blind. Again, this gives far more range for generating flavor in your character, far beyond the confining universe of DnD. You can do this for any system, but it is built into GURPS, so you don't have to haggle it out with the DM as much.

2) Event rolls are normally distributed. This is kind of a statistical nerd thing I love about GURPS. The entire system is on the D6. The skill system (so whether or not you succeed on something) is typically the sum of a 3D6 roll. In contrast, D&D is a single D20. So in D&D you have a 5% chance to roll any value on a D20. This commonly means that just due to slightly poor luck, you end up swinging and missing a lot in combat against a far inferior enemy.

In gurps however, if the enemy is inferior to you, there is a diminishing chance that you roll under a particular value (to hit for instance). Since the results of a 3d6 roll are normally distributed (a bell curve) you will most often roll around a value of 10.5, so the MODE and MEAN and MEDIAN of 100 rolls should be like 10 or 11. In contrast in D&D, the MEAN and MEDIAN are 10 or 11, but there is no real MODE (due to a uniform distribution).

To me, this better expresses your character's skill (or lack of skill) as it is harder to fail, when you should succeed, and harder to succeed when you should fail. The difference is 

3) There are no levels or experience points to my knowledge. Instead, after an adventure you are rewarded development points. You can bank them and save up to improve an attribute, or you can go up in a skill, or do other stuff. I really like this because you actually slowly get better over time, not suddenly become way more awesome because you gained that key level. It also gives you more to do in those long vast expanses between level ups.

14 hours ago, Zeev said:

Mathed out the only units core orcs beat, point for point, are undead and dread elf spears. That actually gets worse when using sword and board...then you only beat the undead. It also takes 9 rounds of combat to do so on average...

So then you really dont lose much in the way of killing power when you take shields. The strength is in the static combat res. The shields simply allow you to survive a bit better.

2 hours ago, Prophecy said:

My last tournament game had a full block of skinks and kroxigors. I didn't use any sauras warriors.

How did that turn out for the skinks?

I totally agree. I guess I am thinking more of the 50x units of trash, which for valorunbound, is a staple.

I just realized I cant make this event, I have a rafting trip that weekend which I scheduled far outside my limited short term memory.

-1 for the good guys :(

Quite true, stubborn and steadfast are the bane of this orc build.

Shields do matter! I think the turn off people have to orcs and shields is that goblins do a great job of dieing in droves to hold your opponent there, the classic "tarpit". Orcs with shields servers a similar purpose to "tarpit" as it provides them no damage causing offensive value. Since orcs have choppas, it is pretty common thinking to do whatever you can to fully capitalize on that special rule.

Orcs with shields do not fully capitalize on offensive damage HOWEVER, remember every good front/front clash is as much about offence as it is defense. Fixxer's point is that if you build enough static combat res, which is the number you count up at the end of close combat, so for instance.

+1 for charge

+3 for ranks

+1 for banner

+1 for war banner

+1 for BSB

+ whatever for Waagh

This amount is a guaranteed (static), regardless of how badly you roll (unless you start losing ranks). The sweet thing about this is that you can crash into a lord or something that has 6 attacks. Even if all 6 attacks generate unsaved wounds and you do nothing in return, you still win the combat and could potentially run that lord down.

Shields provide the benefit of making that final combat res gap larger, by denying your opponent from doing significant damage to you.

You don't have to kill your opponent, only cause them to flee.

I like Fixxer's approach to looking at the Combat Rez. I watched him make some moves at OFCC which to me looked like suicide, but once he explained the guaranteed CR, it was actually quite brilliant. I am starting to realize that static CR is actually really powerful because you cant fluff it.

Also, consider your unit size. If you are running at less than horde formation, you are giving up 33% output, if you are running at a horde size, you are only giving up 25%.

Do the expansion ships come with extra of the other game jazz, such as tokens, dice, damage, ect? Would it be useful to have two sets of maneuver sticks and laser ranges, or is there no pre-measuring in the game?

I guess I am thinking if someone wants to sort of throw some maneuver templates down to get a feel for their options before committing to a maneuver choice. But if that is against the rules, then that simplifies the choice.

Has anyone played an opponent that brought something like these?

https://www.target.com/p/star-wars-the-force-awakens-micro-machines-deluxe-vehicle-pack-galactic-showdown/-/A-21436446#lnk=sametab

I remember thinking these little plastic fighters were expensive as a kid. Economies of scale has caught up with everything else in the world, what happened here?

1 hour ago, InfestedKerrigan said:

I think the big thing here is what do you want to see visually? The Battle of Yavin or The Battle of Endor? I prefer Endor, myself. ^_^

Personally, Endor.

But if the complexity detracts from casual folks playing then I am at a loss for playing. It sounds like X-Wing is the gateway drug to Armada.

For both systems should I safely assume that buying two starter packs is enough to play a standard game?

2 hours ago, DisruptiveConduct said:

Hey man,

 

I cannot speak to Armada. I enjoyed X-Wing for quiet some time. It can be real tactical or real beer and pretzel depending on how you want to play.

 

100 pts is a standard size game in X-Wing usually netting between 3-6 ships depending on upgrades. The games do last 1-1.5 hours.

 

If you are interested, I know some one with a collection for sale that would get you started! 

Ummm, yes!

Hey everyone,

I am thinking of branching a bit out of my Fantasy (KoW and T9A) shell to incorporate another kind of miniatures system. One of my main goals is to grab a game that someone who is unfamiliar with miniatures war gaming, or is not necessarily a huge strategist, can pick up and have fun playing. I think there are enough star wars fans out there that this game is an easy buy in (meaning they would be interested in hearing more once I say star wars).

My initial feeling was to get Armada, because the scale is more to my tastes and it seemed like a more forgiving game just from the concept of an Armada. To me that would be good for new comers.

I then noticed that Armada is a 2 hour game?! Two hours may be a stretch for some people.

From your perspective what would you think is a better game for people new to the concept? Does the ease of rules for Xwing with the smaller scale and shorter game length make it a superior game, or would Armada, with the larger stakes, and the very powerful capitol ships provide enough reward (killing squadrons) for new players to keep them interested?

What is sort of the minimum size of points you prefer to play with either system? It seems like 1 Xwing vs 2 TIE fighters would get pretty boring pretty fast. But so might 1 SD vs 2 rebel capital ships and a bunch of fighter squads.

Hey guys,

Thanks for the games on Saturday, it was a good time! Ill try to make a couple more of these events for your overall campaign, next time with fewer rifles and more snappy toothed lizards.

cooooooool,

Where did they come from?

How many figures are in a 5lb bag? That sounds like quite the force.

Salamanders and Dwarves (Dwarves are contingent on my roommate deciding to show up).

Is this a situation where we need to bring 1 list and stick to it? I was sort of thinking about bringing a range of lists in case one really sucked, or was not fun to play against.

I have not seen any weekend updates yet, did you not realise a new Hardcore History dropped last week?

GET WITH IT!