VULKANS - UNDERCOSTED? ...

[dmcgee1]

This is supposed to be a discussion to try and fix a point that "seems" to need fixing

Judging by dcmgee1's first post, he was more trying to prove that everything is ok and does not need fixing.

Actually, I intended to open discussion regarding whether it needs fixing - or not.  In my opening statement, I provided pro and con, and chose the side of, "They seem fine, to me."

In my case Thom's ruling is not that important - Warzone community in Poland has decided about swapping Vulkan weapons for regular HMG some time ago, and it is an official ruling on all tournaments in Poland.   ...   (BTW - it is not the only change we have made, for example Apocalypse is reduced to the small template, as the large template variant was found to be too powerful for its cost).

So be it.  Obviously, it is not of your concern, then, how we decide the issue.  You have taken it upon yourselves to change the rules as you see fit.  It works for you, and enhances the enjoyment of your games.  You are, obviously, set in your beliefs.  I am trying to remain open to other possibilities.  Your disregard (your words) for Thom's ruling is noted, and I feel that you cannot "debate" the issue from a standpoint that you may not be correct.  I cannot (nor, do I suspect, can anyone) argue any point with someone who is so set.  Further, I won't.  My choice.

You know Pietia, I have to agree with Dmcgee1 on this. Your attitude in your posts comes off as arrogant and pompous.

What exactly do you find arrogant and pompous? Backing my opinion with examples (e.g. "half vulkan" and the survival chances for FT attack)? Refusal to share something I am not legally entitled to share (and you can work out yourself in 2 evenings)? My language (If it is the case,  I am sorry - I am not native english speaker, and I am not exactly sure what is considered arrogant in the US at this moment).

but I wont be responding to your comments again.

Your choice.

This is exactly what I was trying to avoid/diffuse.  I would ask that both of you, please, refrain from stating anything further regarding what can and cannot be discerned, emotionally, from text.  It does neither the game, nor this discussion any service.  Please, I am asking both of you to stop this, here, and, if not apologize, at least, just let it go.

[Pietia]

So be it.  Obviously, it is not of your concern, then, how we decide the issue.  You have taken it upon yourselves to change the rules as you see fit.  It works for you, and enhances the enjoyment of your games.  You are, obviously, set in your beliefs.  I am trying to remain open to other possibilities.  Your disregard (your words) for Thom's ruling is noted, and I feel that you cannot "debate" the issue from a standpoint that you may not be correct.  I cannot (nor, do I suspect, can anyone) argue any point with someone who is so set.  Further, I won't.  My choice.

To make one thing clear - I am not trying to make you guys choose any approach towards solving the "vulkan problem" (or to make you solve the problem at all).  I simply saw your reasoning and tried to point out flaws in it - something we call constructive criticism (I hope that this is not considered rude in the US). I think that my points are reasonable (let's disregard the ones about the rubric, I got sidetracked a little bit - the flaws in the rubric are not the point of this discussion). Of course what you'll do with them (even if you take them into account at all) is, and always will be your choice.
BTW - if anybody felt insulted at any point, I'm sorry - I've found out, that in Europe we tend to be much more direct in our discussions than you, guys. Unfortunately I usually forget about it when discussing with americans. Any attacks are aimed at the idea or way of thinking, not the person behind it.

[Dr. Nick]

I've found out, that in Europe we tend to be much more direct in our discussions than you, guys.

  thats what happened to me in brazil... people reacted very strong to my voice and manner, which are "in normal" propotions here..
I am not a rude, agressive guy... I thought until I went there..

in germany we have the phrase of saying something "in good german" (auf gut deutsch), that you use before you say something harsh/direct...


never the less, to claim to be 99 % correct including finding some post tempering with weapons (like mac from x2 to x1) is difficult to belive, without backup numbers..

also I don“t understand why it is a problem to share. I am very sure it won“t break any law to spread some calculations that were destilled from published point costs... how could that be illigal? if you would sell the information, perhaps, but even then...


@vulcans: I think they are very good because the tac sense. but them behind a meat shild and you have a perfect support...
a orca really does not compare there.
however, I think that with CC troops, perhaps in conjunction with deadshot guys, they are not so effective.. just a very high number of them would be awful.
but thats the same with 8 snipers... they are even worse in my opinion..

cheers

[Pietia]

how could that be illigal? if you would sell the information, perhaps, but even then...

It is unauthorized distribution of information gained from re-engineering of intelectual property of another person/entity. (effectively it is the same as if I reverse-engineered the Windows kernel and published the information on the net - a copyright infrigenment even if my source code was only a partial match). Illegal under most copyright/ip protection legislations in the western world. For sure illegal in Poland (as a freelance IT specialist I have to know a little bit about our legislation on this matter), US law is IIRC even more strict about it.

[Dr. Nick]

well maybe if you "copy" a software by this means...


but to refigure a point system (moreover from a out of print game), I can hardly belive that this would be problematic...

[Veez]

The other thing to consider is that it is a dead system.

Except that its creator whose name shall not be mentioned but who somehow "owns" the Dark Symmetry System (interesting how he could use that as a name for it) is sitting on it.  I think he believes he will re-release it at some time but let's be frank, it will most likely never see the light of day again.

[PFC joe]

Even if the game is dead, the parent IP holder, Paradox, still holds all rights and liscences to the Mutant Chronicles properties.  As it was designed around the MC universe, the Rubric would have to be stripped down to an almost generic level before it could be released and even then it could still possibly be litigated as it is a derived object.  Paradox does still have an intrest in the property as it would most likely be a directly competing line with the still in the works CMG from Fantasy Flight games.

On top of that, I personally never want to see the rubric in the wild.  You just can't trust people to make balanced units and it annuls tourney play.  At best I'd approve of a small group, a benevolent one, carryin on playtesting and release of new and community vetted units, a central source as opposed to a hundred homebrews.

-PFC joe

[Veez]

Legally you are most likely correct although He Who Shall Not Be Named does own the rights so (assuming he does scrub to be generic) technically he might get away with it. 

I agree about the vettec council but the problem is we don't have that group.  There was talk of forming one but nothing ever came of it.  There are only a few additions I'd like to see anyway (i.e. figs that have no rules and a couple of APCs for the other corps and a special character or two).  Of course we don't have the rubric either so it is a moot point.

I have debated starting a Luna Chronicler as a source for game ideas, battle reports, the occasional new troop and the like but time (although currently on my side) will be becoming very short soon.

[dmcgee1]

Pietia, I appreciate your sentiments.  Thanks.

Meanwhile, back at the discussion, I have come to realize something.  Apparently, I am guilty of doing a model-to-model comparison.  What I intended was to show that there are comparable units, and, when held to their armies, make me believe, further, that the Vulkans are not undercosted.  The Atillas and Scorpio may be (model-to-model) inferior to the Vulkans.  However, their army consits, usually, of even more multi-wound models, whereas Bauhaus has few (barring individuals) mulit-wound models.

For your number-crunchers out there, run a set of numbers that includes an entire army.  Include a full squad (or two) of Vulkans in a Bauhas Army, then do so for a Cyber army that includes an EDD, a squad of Atillas with Scorpion, a support Scorpion, Mirrormen, and whatever else makes the army legal.

If, at that point, the numbers are still heavily weighted in the Vulkans favor, I will reconsider my stance.

Remember, model-per-model may show some irregularities.  I believe, however, across an army (especially large armies), the points will allow for balanced forces.  Obviously, as with any other small sampling, smaller armies may show some imbalances.

Here's the Cyber Force I came up with:

4 Squads of Machinator Mk I's
 - 4 Troopers each
1 Squad of Mirrormen
 - 4 Troopers
1 Squad of Atillas
 - 3 Troopers
 - 1 Scorpion Specialist
1 Support Scorpion
1 Support EDD AV

This force contains:
16 models with AR 21 and 2 WD each
  4 models with AR 20 and 2 WD each
  3 models with AR 22 and 3 WD each
  2 models with AR 24 (and a shield) and 3 WD each
  1 model with AR 23 and 6 WD
...for a total of 61 WD and heavy Armor at 998 PC, not to mention good mobility, and a vehicle (Move and Fire).

Please, use this force when crunching numbers.  I will post a comparable Bauhaus force, soon, including Vulkans.

Remember, model-per-model may show some irregularities.  I believe, however, across an army (especially large armies), the points will allow for balanced forces.  Obviously, as with any other small sampling, smaller armies may show some imbalances.

[Ruther]

Thats a hardt nut to crack 

[PFC joe]

Sorry, Apples and Oranges again.

The Cyber force only has five units that can engage a target at anything other than Short/PB range and of those five they are only mediocre at Medium where the majority of engagements take place.

Any comparable Bauhaus force, Vulcans inclusive or not, can engage at just about any range and generally with high Dam weapons combined with relatively high RC, those Dukies are nasty. 

Atilla's just can't fight back until they hit medium whereas a Vulkan can control the board given a couple firing lanes.

(one of the big failings of any Cybertronic army is that the most durable cheap units have the shortest engagement ranges)

-PFC joe

[PhillySniper]

PFC Joe I agree that Vulkans have alot of firepower< I think we all do>. There are ways to avoid or make it useless.
Mirrormen with their infiltrate skill can get in close and do damage before The Vulkans can return fire and maybe apply a wound with it secondary attack. a Models with stalk or stealth can get inside their range without being spotted< a charging from concealment reaper of souls can be devastating>. Just a couple of ways Ive seen used to defeat Vulkans.

I have another comparison for Vulkans, Praetorian Stalkers. Yes they are more expensive but look at all the other abilities they have< para deploy an extra wound and they can be a medic.>

[jjdodger]

Dave:

i will bring the force you just composed for cyber tommorrow night. we'll see just how well you do. Bring whatever 1k point bauhaus army you want. we'll see how it goes. Environment and level are up to you, incuding night fight.

[Archer]

Dave:

i will bring the force you just composed for cyber tommorrow night. we'll see just how well you do. Bring whatever 1k point bauhaus army you want. we'll see how it goes. Environment and level are up to you, incuding night fight.

  Should be an interesting match and bloody.

  One thing to remember-   He who shall not be named was responsible for Bauhaus values in this edition..  And it was his fav corp, if I recall correctly.

  I know their values were off as I *had * the rubric in my posession at one point.  VUlkans are under valued by 5 points, per the rubric.  Most of the Bauhaus units were to one degree or another.   Chuck Kassing was there when we ran the numbers... and he was surprised.

[jjdodger]

In the interest of being a little less biased, i can either play the cyber side, or the bauhaus side.. it makes no difference to me...