|
Post by mikedski on Jan 27, 2018 9:06:49 GMT
I play Martians and usually see it as an uphill battle. Luck aside (so many golden bb shots have felled tripods), Rough Riders and MG's (teams and tanks) can chew up Tripods. Don't forget stealth blips and orders. Keep up the fight! I tend to house rule 1) MGs rate of fire of 1 against machines, keep +1 power. 2) Each rough rider team/ stand can only launch two attacks per game since only two motorcycles per stand. In some of my game photographs you will see I will place two immobilization tokens on each stand to represent their supply.
|
|
|
Post by mikedski on Jan 27, 2018 10:00:00 GMT
I will admit that Scott's books are helping with rocket launchers now in the mix but official rules still only list bombs as infantry weapons. I feel something has got to change to make the human player get some upper hand without having to shell out over $100.00 to get a land ironclad or clutter the game board up with lots of steam tanks. Now true there are anti-tripod guns, but they are towed, not mobile and like in WW2 anti-tank guns, an ambush weapon for anything over three tripods and your gun is toast. Like I said, maybe some thing can change so that us human players have some chance of a win for even as we were playing this week end some other folks watching the games loved the look of the tripods and Marines but stated "Unless you are a Martian you can not win this game." Then they wondered over to watch a Flames of War game on the next table. I suppose the great difficulty of any game is to ensure a 50-50 win loss ratio based on points and scenario design. And unfortunately the original production design team went belly up before any thought of rule set 2.0 could come along. There were certainly many, many threads about suggested rule changes. Just ask Mad Morgan! Also the scenario rules in the main rule book are not all that appealing. I have found the Martians have a more difficult time. The machines are brittle. Chink an assault tripod's armor and pile on! The damage table is not too forgiving. 50% chance of something not very good happening. As far as infantry 1) lots of infantry and MG teams can make a US Army force difficult to break - so many to kill! Stealth tokens, terrain bonus, and ambush rules. 2) Consider buying more HQ units to help rally routed units. 3) Consider a house rule to buff infantry squads with a 3+ assault attack for extra cost. The main rule book gives US Cavalry unit an option of increase attack for an additional 15 points. I always thought it was odd that infantry didn't have the option. 4) I think forlorn hope teams should be only an additional +5 points since they are a one shot wonder. Their big advantage to me is that they have six inch range from their base unit for the assault. You move the unit 6 inches (or twelve with a command token) and then another 6 inch assault with FH team. 5) The recoilless weapons and stove pipes are a nice new concept.
|
|
|
Post by mikedski on Jan 27, 2018 10:25:27 GMT
Makes me wonder why the game is not 6mm (1/285th) scale so you can field a lot of tanks, guns and land ironclads. 15mm is mainly infantry skirmish games with some tanks. What appealed to me was the scale. I had plenty of 15mm terrain from FOW so lessened the start up cost. Then with Paper Terrain buildings ( Hi Scott!) I was open for business. Tons of HO scale terrain available. I am fortunate that not too far away is model train store that has quite a stock of new and second hand terrain. As you can probably tell from my Batreps I am really into the table top terrain. My experience has been that about 6- 8 or so tripods and comparable human force is about right for 6x4 table. I have expanded to 8x5-ish table thinking that would help the Martian to spread out and use superior mobility for an advantage but it allowed human artillery an expanded engagement window while forcing the Martians to use an additional turn or two to get into a decisive battle.
|
|
|
Post by boxholder on Jan 27, 2018 14:14:05 GMT
Good observations, mikedski. Bigger is not always better.
Shorter table length equals less time for the defenders to service in approaching tripods. Definitely adds pressure to the defenders' situation. It makes obstructions and terrain even more important to the defenders.
Re:6mm The smaller figures and vehicles do make it possible to have large numbers of units on the table. I was into the GW "Epic" Space Marines/Titan Legions genre. It really had some sweeping vistas of battlefields with swarms of units engaged. Very quick to paint because you just had to suggest the details. At the time, there was only limited terrain stuff available, so you were locked into the Warhammer 40K universe. Did not get to be a problem, though, because GW 86'd the product line before we had played enough to exhaust the basic possibilities.
If you look back a ways, I think madmorgan was talking about a briefcase size demonstration set using 6mm stuff. He used transitors for the tripods, IIRC. Pretty neat idea.
|
|
|
Post by hardlec on Jan 27, 2018 14:53:36 GMT
If possible, try playing on a round 6' diameter table. This removes the "edge of the world" situation.
|
|
|
Post by greenbeanie on Jan 28, 2018 13:54:48 GMT
It also makes it easier to get your mitts on the "Cheating sod" on the other end of the table.
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Feb 12, 2018 19:43:40 GMT
I think the current IM for resurrection is a better one - after all 25% more units to kill doesn't help that much compared to a MkIV or platoon of Mk III s returning to the battle. Especially as the Martians shrink the amount of battlefield left with their advance.
|
|
|
Post by dawgofflanders on Sept 22, 2019 16:59:12 GMT
Hi All, I've been out of the loop a while. We played an encounter game a few weeks ago to get back into the game system. Scout Tripods vs. Cavalry, Armoured Cars and a field battery. Equal points. As "Terrance" said, a lucky hit blew up one Scout standing beside (too close) another Scout. Concentrated fire of the humans and a couple of distractions finished off the Martians. In most of our games the Martians 'get cocky' and tend to do sudden attack moves without much thought for communication. We game with a long time group of my friends and now my son and his friends. The young guys are really crazy fun to game with. We game strictly for fun, but still we do try to win.
|
|
|
Post by boxholder on Sept 22, 2019 20:14:37 GMT
FUN is what AQMF was made for!!! Some people reach the point of gaming for "blood." When it gets to be that serious, I go looking for other players. It's not fun anymore.
Encourage the new guys. That is how the hobby grows and sustains.
Good on ya!
|
|
|
Post by dawgofflanders on Sept 23, 2019 1:06:50 GMT
They are over right now. Playing the new Call of Duty, painting and then Age of Sigmar. Ah to be 21 years old and in University! Thanks for the encouragement.
I'll post up my latest painting later.
|
|
|
Post by easye on Sept 24, 2019 3:06:09 GMT
AQMF is not a competition game. It is a asymmetrical battle and designed for scenario play between friendlies.
The asymetrical nature and look is what attracted me to it.
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Oct 3, 2019 20:03:33 GMT
Welcome back dawg! I don't know about the University thing. I'll take the 21 age, but, I was usually too broke to buy games in college. I remember my two friends and I scraping together the $10 to by the original D&D basic (white box) set. We took turns having the rules, making up runs, and playing. It was a golden age without the gold. I remember saving pennies and nickels to buy the $5 expansion books. Things have changed, but, the love of games not so much.
|
|
|
Post by dawgofflanders on Oct 7, 2019 0:55:42 GMT
Great to be back, thanks. Still working on taking pictures of my forces- but am watching 1979 Dracula, as a part of Halloween month. Also been painting 'other' figures.
I found a 1/144 scale Airfix Tiger I with a price sticker of $1.25. Today I was looking at a Shapeways Goliath proxy for $105. What a difference.
As for fighting against Martians- I like lots of Infantry, with tanks and artillery.
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Oct 14, 2019 9:12:24 GMT
I prefer a balanced force; Infantry to pin and assault, Tanks to move about and tie down the tripods, and artillery to nail them.
|
|
|
Post by boxholder on Oct 14, 2019 12:36:49 GMT
Hi dawg:
The 3D printed items will always be much more expensive than mass produced injection molding. When you can spread the cost of tooling and labor across thousands of units, the cost becomes reasonable. One-off products must carry a lot of cost: the printer, the filament, the programming, the operation time, the operator time, the shipping and then leave some for profit.
The only rationale for the 3D printed item is that you absolutely must have that specific unit OR you aren't willing to use "Counts As" rules along with some surrogate.
As you note, there is a huge price difference. You can get lots more stuff for the money.
|
|