|
Post by Wyloch on Jan 24, 2020 15:00:05 GMT
But a squad with a psyker could cause a wound with a spell and then with shooting or melee. Ah yes, gotcha. So yeah, per above that would be the rare case that you compel 2 morale tests on the same unit in one activation. I happen to also agree, it'd be nice to say there is ALWAYS either 0 or 1 morale checks and if it's 1, it is the last thing done in an activation.
|
|
|
Post by andyskinner on Jan 24, 2020 15:51:25 GMT
Being pedantic, but not trying to correct. Just pointing out a detail:
You could still cause multiple morale checks if you split your fire, and/or spell someone different than you shoot at.
But 0 or 1 morale check per target unit would be nice. Currently, you can still do one by spell and one by shooting or melee. (Edit to make sure it didn't look like I was saying what current rules do.)
andy
|
|
|
Post by Wyloch on Jan 24, 2020 15:58:16 GMT
Being pedantic, but not trying to correct. Just pointing out a detail: You could still cause multiple morale checks if you split your fire, and/or spell someone different than you shoot at. But 0 or 1 morale check per target unit. andy Great clarification, yessir. "per target unit" is the key.
|
|
egge
Member
Posts: 120
|
Post by egge on Jan 24, 2020 18:48:27 GMT
Exactly as I hope for. Makes it a bit easier.
|
|
|
Post by onepagerules on Jan 25, 2020 14:27:18 GMT
I'm going to be honest, I'm not 100% sure if the confusion comes from the way the rules are actually written, or from what feels most intuitive to players based on experience with other games. Either way, it makes me sad to see that there's still so much confusion, and I will keep making efforts to re-write things to make the rules clearer.
That being said, sometimes I think that maybe the easiest solution would've been to just change the morale rules entirely, say make it so that you take a morale test whenever you activate and are at half or less of your starting strength, and if you fail you are pinned or get some sort of penalty. Maybe this is a good idea for a future game...
|
|
|
Post by mikez on Jan 25, 2020 16:28:05 GMT
imo it is very intuitive: every wound or casualties suffered does test your will to fight. to make a unit run for the hills you just need to focus it down. i personaly don't want to keep on fighting if i am beaten up like crazy ^^ so if an unit sufferes enough beating it could rout just from failing a dangerous terrain test and losing a model. because it is written that every wound below 50% model/tough value causes a moral test (after the shooting or meele or effect of a spell ends). there is so much tatic behind using moral against your enemy. I would agree. This also means that if a unit fails a morale test from being shoot by one unit, the next unit can focus their attention else where. These rules are written to in a manner which suggests the games are fast and furious.
|
|
egge
Member
Posts: 120
|
Post by egge on Jan 27, 2020 15:47:37 GMT
To be honest I do not think there is much confusion of the rules. But I do think that it should be enough with one morale test on a unit per activation "At the end of an activation, each unit that took any damage and are at half models/tough or less must take a morale test".
Broken English aside I do think that it is fun to take lots of tests during an entire turn. It is one of the things I really like with Onepage. I think you should be forced to take morale tests even from dangerous terrain when at half models/tough:
Dave and Hunt are the last two soldiers left. But they struggle on as Dave has a big cannon with him and if they are lucky that big ass tank gonna get it. They are jumping carefully from stones to stones over the large lake. "You know..." Hunt starts out, hoping to encourage his mate. "...although this lake is dangerous it is really nice to have you here as well." But no answer comes. Hunt turns around. Dave is gone. Left is only his cap, floating in the water. "Damn, I guess I need to go along by my self." He start to aim his next jump. He catches something at the perifiar...prefr...periffir... at the edge of his sight and he sees Dave's cap being swallowed by dino-mice with laser shooting out of their eyes, a cougar-shark with toxin-ears and that stupid dog with many heads from Harry Potter that small children can fool. Then Dave's hat explodes from a self sacrificing ninja-clamp. Hunt stares at his path, it is now filled with dine-mice. "You know what? I think I'll go back now."
Yes, I want to have morale tests from dangerous terrain as if you have lost half your squad, loosing someone else can be a very deciding factor to fall back or leave the area.
|
|
|
Post by andyskinner on Jan 27, 2020 15:57:35 GMT
I think units do take morale tests from wounds from dangerous terrain tests. Though I don't think they take a separate one if it is from Phalanx in AoF. That one gets rolled into the melee, I think.
I'm happy with units taking morale tests as they get shot, and certainly at melee. But it could be a bit clearer that it is after all moving by a unit (dangerous terrain), after magic, and after shooting or melee. That shooting by different weapons count together and magic doesn't isn't obvious to me from the rules.
andy
|
|
|
Post by Wyloch on Jan 27, 2020 16:44:03 GMT
"At the end of every activation, any units which took wounds during that activation and which are currently at half or less their original Tough value take a Morale test."
[and then the melee section has its caveat just as it does now]
?
|
|
|
Post by goodcaptainmike on Jan 28, 2020 14:41:46 GMT
That being said, sometimes I think that maybe the easiest solution would've been to just change the morale rules entirely, say make it so that you take a morale test whenever you activate and are at half or less of your starting strength, and if you fail you are pinned or get some sort of penalty. Maybe this is a good idea for a future game... This sounds like a really good idea!
|
|
|
Post by barrys on Jan 28, 2020 16:54:46 GMT
sometimes I think that maybe the easiest solution would've been to just change the morale rules entirely, say make it so that you take a morale test whenever you activate and are at half or less of your starting strength, and if you fail you are pinned or get some sort of penalty. That sounds like a clever simplification, and it's similar in concept to how Bolt Action handles pin markers and activations. The devil's in the details, mind you. I wonder what the wider ramifications of such a rule change would be? One issue would be the seizing of objectives. A unit which is currently holding an objective may be cut in half by gunfire. Under the present system they'd take an immediate morale check. If that morale check was failed - and they became pinned - then they'd lose control of the objective. In the new system the same massacred unit may elect to never activate again, never have to take a morale check, and never lose control of the objective. To resolve THIS problem, I think, you'd have to insist that all units must be activated in a round. Even a "hold" activation would then compel a morale test. BS
|
|
|
Post by onepagerules on Jan 28, 2020 19:40:49 GMT
Just before anyone gets a wrong idea: I have no intention of changing the morale mechanics right now.
With that being said, yes, changing it to an "on-activation" basis would completely shift the balance of the game, however there could be ways of making the change less swingy by simply re-thinking the concept of a "pinned" unit.
For example what you could do is have it so that whenever a unit takes damage that brings it down to half or less of its starting size, then you would place a pin marker on it, but nothing would happen immediately. Then once the unit is activated you would roll to see if the pin marker is removed, or if the unit loses its activation or takes some sort of penalty. This would still make it so that you only have 1 roll to see if the unit is pinned or not, and it would also make it so that you could pin a unit that was already activated to stop it from seizing a marker.
On the flipside of course this would mean that you're now in the situation where units could lose objectives simply because they had some models killed, without having a chance to even keep morale strong in face of danger. So yeah, again a big shift in balance...
|
|
|
Post by andyskinner on Jan 28, 2020 20:31:18 GMT
I don't think the current rule needs a change. Just a bit of clarification that dangerous terrain tests, magic, and attacks, can each cause a roll, OR the smaller change of not handling magic separately from attacks. The latter makes sense to me, similarly to how very different weapons are put together during attacks. But it isn't important to me.
andy
|
|
|
Post by ironmike on Jan 28, 2020 22:47:33 GMT
I agree with Andy. Knowing whether a unit is pinned is very strategically important during the game (don't worry about them or rush in to finish them off) and check on activation would impact the end of the game where a potentially pinned unit could hold or contest an objective. Spencer and my battles are usually determined by final turn heroics (or cowardice) that definitively claims or denies objectives.
Also the idea of multiple morale tests (within reason) makes sense to me as each casualty would become increasingly jarring to the unit. I am picturing a unit who loses wounds going through dangerous terrain and they steady themselves to the loss (successfully passes a morale check) but then a psycher blasts them and they say "F this!" (fail the next morale test and become pinned).
|
|
|
Post by Wyloch on Jan 30, 2020 13:39:05 GMT
I know anon was clear that there are no changes coming with regard to Morale, but for the record....I revise my previous stance.
Psychics compelling a morale check when they do damage makes them more effective. Which they need, since Psychics are generally pretty ineffective.
So I like morale currently exactly as-is. :-D
|
|