VULKANS - UNDERCOSTED? ...

[dmcgee1]

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...

I'll take that challenge.  However, in the interest of fairness, it should be run, several times, in several environments, by several people.  I believe that the results will surprise many.

[Heretyk]

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

You are not comparing apples to apples (as PFC joe mentioned). I will help you bit:

BAUHAUS

Ducal Militia (4+sgt)
Vulkan Battlesuits (3+sgt)
Ducal Militia (4+sgt)
Vulkan Battlesuits (3+sgt)
Ducal Militia (4+sgt)
Vulkan Battlesuits (3+sgt)
Ducal Militia (4+sgt)
Vulkan Battlesuits (3+sgt)

TOTAL 972

12 x MHMG
16 x Assault Rifle

16 WD at 18 AR
24 WD at 24 AR

IMPERIAL

ISC Gendarmes (4)
ISC Gendarmes (4)
Hedgehog Necromower (2)
ISC Gendarmes (4)
ISC Gendarmes (4)
Hedgehog Necromower (2)
ISC Gendarmes (4)
ISC Gendarmes (4)
Hedgehog Necromower (2)
ISC Gendarmes (4)
ISC Gendarmes (4)
Hedgehog Necromower (2)

TOTAL 944

32 x SMG
8 x MHMG

32 WD at 16 AR
24 WD at 21 AR

This is the closest match, that i have found so far (in terms of MHMGs per side). The next thing should be Mishima with Ronin Battlewalkers. It seems that Imperial has some chances, fighting this kind of Bauhaus, but it is only a mirage. The good shooting range for SMGs is SR (they fire twice at that range). Getting in 12" to Ducal Militia, or Vulkans will be very hard, and will end in big loses in ISC (16 AR speaks for itself, as Bauhaus Assault Rifle has DAM 11, MHMG is DAM 14). Shielding the ISCes with Hegehogs won't be an option also. They will lose any possible firefight with Vulkans (they have 3 less AR, and their weapon inflicts 1 point of DAM less). The Vulkans Sgt would try to shoot the ISC first (using Tactical Sense). The only hope for Imperial is LOS limited to 24" or less. With no loss limitations (and statistical dices), there can be only one winner...

  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.

I tend to disagree. Most of our (mine and Pietia's) work on reverse-engineering the formula leads us to believe, that the formula is the same across a large number of models (this includes Vulkans). There are some deviation from the rulebook, but they are in range +/-1 PCs (probably rounding errors, as we don't know the basic stat-line from which everything was calculated). There are some models, which are hard to calculate, because some Special Abilities were given to only one model in the book. And the rulebook doesn’t give us sometimes the right answer - for example the Trencher Captain had Air Warhorn - was his PC calculated with this piece of equipment, or not?
In the end, the formula works on most models flawlessly.

English isn't my native language. Sorry for any mistakes made.

[dmcgee1]

Your English is fine; I understood everything very well.

I am not trying to compare the Vulkan Army of Doom to anything.  I feel that that is a very cheesy army.  However, throwing in 1 or two squads of Vulkans (depending on army size) should not throw any opponent into a cardiac arrest (it hasn't yet, around my area).

I am merely trying to get the point across that, under normal playing conditions, the "disparity" is not what most think that it is.

Your math is a bit off...

BAUHAUS

Ducal Militia (4+sgt)
Vulkan Battlesuits (3+sgt)
Ducal Militia (4+sgt)
Vulkan Battlesuits (3+sgt)
Ducal Militia (4+sgt)
Vulkan Battlesuits (3+sgt)
Ducal Militia (4+sgt)
Vulkan Battlesuits (3+sgt)

TOTAL 972

12 x MHMG
16 x Assault Rifle

16 WD at 18 AR
24 WD at 24 AR

It is, actually:
16 x MHMG
20 x Assault Rifle

20 WD at 18 AR
32 WD at 24 AR

The good shooting range for SMGs is SR (they fire twice at that range). Getting in 12" to Ducal Militia, or Vulkans will be very hard, and will end in big loses in ISC (16 AR speaks for itself, as Bauhaus Assault Rifle has DAM 11, MHMG is DAM 14). Shielding the ISCes with Hegehogs won't be an option also. They will lose any possible firefight with Vulkans (they have 3 less AR, and their weapon inflicts 1 point of DAM less). The Vulkans Sgt would try to shoot the ISC first (using Tactical Sense). The only hope for Imperial is LOS limited to 24" or less. With no loss limitations (and statistical dices), there can be only one winner...

I disagree, here.  Firstly, in a 1000 PC army, Bauhaus can add one extra Ducal Militia trooper, while Imperial may add 3 more Gendarmes.  Now, Imperial has a total of 43 shooters, while Bauhaus has but 37 - not a good advantage, but an advantage in numbers, nonetheless.

This would make the numbers, now:

BAUHAUS

Ducal Militia (5+sgt)
Vulkan Battlesuits (3+sgt)
Ducal Militia (4+sgt)
Vulkan Battlesuits (3+sgt)
Ducal Militia (4+sgt)
Vulkan Battlesuits (3+sgt)
Ducal Militia (4+sgt)
Vulkan Battlesuits (3+sgt)

TOTAL 988

16 x MHMG
21 x Assault Rifle

21 WD at 18 AR
32 WD at 24 AR

IMPERIAL

ISC Gendarmes (5)
ISC Gendarmes (5)
Hedgehog Necromower (2)
ISC Gendarmes (5)
ISC Gendarmes (4)
Hedgehog Necromower (2)
ISC Gendarmes (4)
ISC Gendarmes (4)
Hedgehog Necromower (2)
ISC Gendarmes (4)
ISC Gendarmes (4)
Hedgehog Necromower (2)

TOTAL 992

35 x SMG
8 x MHMG

35 WD at 16 AR
24 WD at 21 AR

That's 6 extra wounds and 6 extra shooters.

I am not sure what kind of boards on which you play, normally.  The rulebook specifically calls for a 24" separation of deployment zones, so getting to 24", even out of the gate, shouldn't be a problem.  The boards we set up rarely have long corridors of fire.  If a sniper, or other long-ranged trooper wishes to use his superior range, he is, usually, forced to move to a position of superiority - it doesn't just happen out of the gate, so to speak.  It is, in our games, easy to find cover.  This forces strategy, as opposed to, "Line 'em up and roll dice!"  If I want my Vulkans to mow down fodder, I have to hunt the fodder.  Few charge headlong and hope that their meatshields stand up long enough for the real troops to get optimal range.  A bit of work is necessary to achieve tactical advantages and such.

While I appreciate the numbers, I am a bit surprised that other tangibles and intangibles are left out.  Having more shooters is good.  That's a numbers thing.  Several have argued this in this thread, alone.  There is no way that the Hedgehogs wouldn't wound a few militia in the first turn or two, making it even easier for the Gendarme to get closer and use their superior numbers and the superior firepower (at SR and PB) to hurt the opponent.  Further, the Hedgehogs can move and fire - a huge advantage.

We are never going to be able to compare apples to apples - it, truly, doesn't exist.  However, we could just accept comparing apples to oranges, as this game is all about diversity of armies and different styles and tactics.  I think that we should all realize that there is no easy comparison, and roll it out.  Set up several games, and see how it goes.  Again, I think people will be surprised.  I have been fortunate to have some very good opponents (you all know who you are) who have shown me that I am not even remotely unstoppable when I use Vulkans.  Not one of them has a complaint.  I am confused at some others' complaints about Vulkans.  Further, I am concerned that people have taken to making house rules which alter the mechanic and dissuade the use of units.  May I ask; since changing the way that the Polish players use Vulkans, has there been less use of them?  If so, I think that is bad.

[dmcgee1]

I will take pictures of jjdodger's and my battle.  Perhaps we are using too much terrain?  I would like some input, especially from our Polish friends.  I am curious to see if we are on the same lines, regarding terrain and board setup.

[Heretyk]

Sorry for the error in math, I have omitted the sgts.
As for the army rosters, I deliberately didn't max it out. Those three extra ISCs and one extra Ducal wouldn't change the picture. It's better to take:
-an officer to boost the Initiative roll (for Imperial roster)
-take some night vision equipment (for Vulkans in Bauhaus roster)
-buy some hazmat suits (for both rosters)

In Poland we play with armies worth 1200 PCs. The deployment zones are separated by ~36" (this can vary from tournament to tournament [not the same tables, etc.], but only by ~3"). BTW: The rulebook says of "at least 24" between armies" (see p.111). We also tend to use environmental rules from the rulebook (up to level 6). Since we had a grand tournament last week, I can give you a general description of table rules used (this can be a good indication of tables played in Poland). 21 tables broken into:
-4 tables with no restrictions
-3 tables with night rules
-3 tables with desert rules (level 2, level 4 and level 6)
-3 tables with jungle rules (level 2, level 4 and level 6)
-3 tables with underworld rules (level 2, level 4 and level 6)
-3 tables with arctic rules (level 2, level 4 and level 6)
-1 table with canals rules (custom rules, our own invention)
-1 table with lake rules (custom rules, our own invention)
We think rosters should be balanced for every type of table possible. We tend to favor environmental rules to encourage people to bring Tribes armies and buy survival equipment. As for the photos of tables, they will be published soon on Linia Frontu (when Christof won't be overloaded with work).

And back to the topic - I think that having more SMG won't compensate for the misbalance of MHMGs in our example. SMG shot twice at SR, once at MR, and LR is out of range. Assalut Rifles fire only once, but their range ends at LR. MHMGs twice at MR and LR, and three times at SR. More firepower at LR, the same at MR, less at SR (if the Vulkans will give you a chance).
A good player (and I assume that both players would know the rules to the same degree), would move their heavy gear in front, to minimize casualties in less armored units (Ducals and ISC).
If only half of Vulkan squads would stop and started shooting at the hedgehogs, the necromowers (with 21 AR against DAM 14 on MG-90 MHMG) would be dead by the end of second turn (with four or five Vulkans dead). The other half of Vulkan squads can be utilized as meatshields for Ducals. The Tactical Sense on Vulkan Sgts would score some ISC heads, before getting into MR. And the Ducals don't have to move very close, as they can shoot at LR, only LOS is needed to open the hunting season. Some ISC would probably started shooting at MR, and minority even at SR, but it would be too little, too late (against 24 AR, with no Tactical Sense to choose another target).
Vulkans can be stopped, but only on a table with high environmental levels (limiting LOS). With no restrictions to LOS, the case is closed.

I see that you are using the minimal allowed distance between deployment zones, and this may couse the difference in our points of view. Try with a bigger separation, like 36", using the same amount of terrain.

As for the house rules, we needed stable rules. Thom showed as many times, that some rules written in the rulebook are commonly "misinterpreted" by players (the bonus to shooting with single- and multi-crew vehicles is a good example). Or the other way around, the book was so poorly edited, that only army lists were stable. You should know, that changing rules in the middle of a league can cause some anger in players. We had only two choices - play with rubber rules (that changed from one Thom's answer to another), or write our own interpretation of rules (to end discussions once and for all). As we had permission from Excelsior Entertainment (Thomas Thalamini himself) to write polish translation and include our clarifications, we didn't hesitate choosing. Maybe we took the wrong road, who knows?

The "Vulkan weapon change" house rule ended in Bauhaus players using Vulkans less (some armies were changed, some aren't to this day). Since everybody else (playing not Bauhaus armies) stopped arguing, we don't miss Vulkans with MHMGs. The same goes for Apocalypse. These two changes are tournament rules - we don't enforce any tournament organizers to follow them. It just happens, that people spending their time preparing those events tend to agree with us. Two not so big changes, and everybody calmed down. Is it worth it? Hell, yes.

[Dr. Nick]

A good player (and I assume that both players would know the rules to the same degree), would move their heavy gear in front, to minimize casualties in less armored units (Ducals and ISC).

I don´t play that long, but I wondered: do you use vulcans as a ducal shield??

I thought more about giving them com equip and put them behind grunts... perhaps they have better armor, but 1 wound costs about 20 P and carries a mhmg...

[jjdodger]

The preferred deployment for the vulcans, is behind grunts, with the grunts in MP. Forces the other guy to either eliminate the grunts, or tac sense off of them. Neither is an easy feat.

[dmcgee1]

I rarely do that.  I use Vulkans in many ways.  Sometimes, they are used to divert, believe it or not.  Several times I've moved Vulkans to flank an enemy, only to get him to divert forces in order to create and exploit a weakness elsewhere.

I have seen many boards (jungle, night, etc.) where visibility is limited to the point where no combat happens beyond SR and MR.  To me, this is a great balancer.

That said, I begin to see your points (the loger deployment separation, the necessity for the changes, etc.).  However, it does not change my opinion.  I am not saying that you are wrong.  I am saying that with 1250 PC, there are even more ways, in my opinion to defeat Vulkans, and the players that use them.

I believe that our differences in how the game is setup (we, too, using only 8" DZ's have about 32" of separation between the forces at setup) are causing some of our disagreements, here.  I appreciate the insights, and will take them into account before making broad, sweeping comments, in the future.

[dmcgee1]

I will take pictures of jjdodger's and my battle.  Perhaps we are using too much terrain?  I would like some input, especially from our Polish friends.  I am curious to see if we are on the same lines, regarding terrain and board setup.

Please see the Battle Report (as it unfolds) in the Events, Army Ideas, Battle Reports section under VULKAN PLAYTEST 2006.10.20.

[Heretyk]

I disagree with You, guys. Grunts in MP equals 10% less chance of hitting the target. Having 6 points more AR means saving hits 30% often. It the end, hitting Vulkans may be not so hard task, but wounding them surely is.

Using models with high AR as meatshields is a common practice in tournaments (at least in Poland). You must account, that not so many models have Tactical Sense. You can bet, that minimum 50% of opponents army won't have a chance to change target priority. So now you have to paths - make target priority models hard to hit (with smoke, cover, etc.), or putting your meatshields in the front. The choice is not always so simple as in the Bauhaus roster somewhere above.

The 1200 PC makes battles last a little longer, and lower the chance of dice misbehavior. The limit was chosen with Fire Missions in mind (most armies have trouble fitting a legally deployed Force Commander with some other reasonable units besides in 1000 PC roster). With such armies different tactics can be achieved. And yes, it's easier to counterbalance Vulkans. But this doesn’t change the main point of this discussion - Vulkans with MHMGs are hard to fight with. You will ending up preparing anti-vulkan rosters (just in case of meeting a Bauhaus player with the battle suits) for every possible tournament. And the game isn't only about Vulkans, if I remember correctly, right?

Limiting LOS (to 24" or even 12") will hurt Vulkans hard (they will still make a mayhem, but some activations will be lost to only moving them). We tend to have a good mix of tables. Every player should be competing on one table with no limitations, one table with some limitations (LOS ~24-36", some malfunctions), and a table preferring short distance units (LOS >24", weapon jams, heavy malfunctions). Playing only on tables with LOS >24" is, IMO, only hiding the problem under a carpet. And some battles (as I recall from Mutant Chronicles RPG sourcebooks) were fought in open terrain.

As for the photos, I can only (at this time) point you to some older tournaments. You won't probably understand a single word, so just scroll down and click the images to enlarge the pictures.
http://www.liniafrontu.ehost.pl/index.php?galeria=84
http://www.liniafrontu.ehost.pl/index.php?galeria=70

[PhillySniper]

Heres a battle I wouldnt mind seeing fought if I had the figs to pull it off. If you are looking for an anti vulkan force or even a force that can play in a tourney with different variations off of this exact list <+/- optional equipment.> I guess this is just my way of saying that you can come up with similar forces for the same approxmate costs. Yes Vulkans can shoot into LR but that doesnt matter if I para deploy into MR or SR and I have the opportunity to heal the undead before they die. So the Vulkans have an advantage but so do the Stalkers. Just some food for thought.

Dark Legion Horde

Undead Legion 5 + Necromutant
Undead Legion 4 + Necromutant
Undead Legion 4 + Necromutant
Undead Legion 4 + Necromutant
Praetorian Stalkers 2 + Enforcer
Praetorian Stalkers 2 + Enforcer
Praetorian Stalkers 2 + Enforcer
Praetorian Stalkers 2 + Enforcer

Total 985

12 HMGs @ 13 Dam
21 ARs @ 10 Dam

17 Wds @ 17 AR
4 Wds @ 18 AR
24 Wds @ 22 AR
12 Wds @ 23 AR

[Heretyk]

Some tables that you have seen may be misleading, because we tend to limit corridors of fire with terrain and environmental rules. You seem to limit them with terrain pieces only. So "overseas" tables may look empty, but they may hold some pretty high terrain levels. We also play with higher force PC, so more open space is needed to maintain unit coherency.

The table that Dmcgee1 showed is little to overcrowded. We play sometimes on tables similar to his, but we limit the corridors of fire with environmental rules (limiting LOS will be the same as using too much terrain).

And for the Vulkan test, if I wanted to prove Vulkans are not undervalued, I would just place them in Canals (you can read the table rules here), and play them against an army with large number of FT specialist. If I wanted to prove them undervalued, I would just place some rocks / hills in middle of table, so there won't be a 24" corridor of fire from one deployment zone to another (or do it simpler, on a flat table limit the LOS to 24", and make the deployment separated by 36"). Different tables, different results. Maybe that is the problem. You are playing on tables with dense terrain, and Vulkans aren't showing their real advantage? Since the system should support many kinds of terrain placements, maybe the Vulkans are to good after all?

I'm eager to know how you intend to successfully use mortars or any kind of weapon with minimal range of MR on tables similar to one showed by Dmcgee1. Sniper rifles won't have a chance to show their superior range, as I don't see any corridor of fire with LR or ER range. Paradeploy will be hindered too, since according to the rules the template's edge must be placed at least 2" from any terrain element (and this means placing the center of the template at least 4" from any terrain piece). Landing will be fun as well, as half of those paratroopers will land prone (falling on terrain elements), not to mention the LD tests. A perfect table to show, that paratroopers can't pay off well.

Healing Praetorians with the Enforcer (or any other undead unit)? Now that's something hilarious. Consider this (at SR range) - You can shoot at an enemy, making him test AR 65% of the time, or try healing undead units with 15% chance of success (I am assuming that a wounded model would be in 3" medic range, and you don't need to move). Did I mention that Scythe of Semai fires two times at SR in one action? Using Enforces as healers may be good  with enemy out of range / LOS, but the primary use should be shooting. They are paying for HMGs, so I would recommend using them. Appling math to this example - in three actions (at SR range) one Enforcer can heal 1 WD, or make enemy unit test AR four times (4 hits). I think the choice is rather obvious. It's get better at PB (7 hits), and worst at CC (2 hits) and MR (1,5 hit).

UWZ is not the best system out there. A solid second edition of the UWZ rulebook (with more examples and more detailed rule descriptions) is needed even to consider the third warzone edition as something that can challenge the best. With so many wargames out there, it's vital to place UWZ somewhere in the ranks. On one end of the scale we have very simple systems, with basic rules (Warmaster Ancients from Specialist Games is a good example). In the opposite corner we have systems with more advanced rules, covering different armor ratings, depending on side in which the units have been shoot at (Mein Panzer from GHQ). UWZ is somewhere in between, maximizing the fun of gameplay, with some elements of realism.

To be fair, I meet people interested in Mutant Chronicle worlds because of the fluff aspects. They don't care about the mechanics of the system. There must something magical, when Scotsmen in space (Imperial Wolfs) storm the trenches filled with zombies and giant monsters (Dark Legion)...

I'm sorry that I'm not answering you in the other topic (VULKAN PLAYTEST), but breaking my post into two (as both would be addressing the same things) would probably end in some misunderstanding.

[Topkick]

As for the Vulkan Army of Doom - I watched Bobcat run one back in the day at Origins one year and he got his rear handed to him because he failed to grasp the tactics necessary to win. I used to box and watched a great number of guys who had the physical tools fail because they could not understand the basics of ring tactics or were too timid to take a shot or two. Same applies in wargames. If you do not understand tactics or if you are afraid to expose your troops to fire because they might take a casualty then you will not win no matter how superior your forces appear to be on paper.

[Heretyk]

You are right, Topkick. Superior tactics can change the outcome of every battle. I’ve witnessed myself winning a tournament in Poland with Inheritors rooster (and there were contenders playing corporation roster also). Better tactics always gives the players an edge.

As the topic goes, try to imagine what would happen, if a skilled player (playing Vulkan Army of Doom) would battle a total newbie with some “not so cheesy” roster. The new player would probably get his ass totally kicked. Some experience earned the hard way, I would say.

But also I must point to you, that we are comparing forces with equal (or at least comparable) level of rule knowledge, tactical awareness, and playing skills for both players. If we don’t do that, the outcome of this simulation will be biased. What is the point of comparing Vulkan Army of Doom with any other roster, if the Bauhaus player will be a total newbie, and his opponent will have years of experience? We can only prove this way, that a newbie will lose to a veteran (and this is probably common knowledge). And we don’t need Vulkans to prove it (or even UWZ, as the same result will be achieved with a game of chess). Sorry, but this can’t be a valid point to our discussion.

[dmcgee1]

It was never my intention to compare the VAoD to anything!

I am saying that Vulkans aren't all that bad, and are not in need of fixing.  Perhaps, some gentlemen's rules need to be observed - call it a "Cheese Rule."  If a player wishes to field Vulkans, he should, then, not be allowed to take another squad of Vulkans without, first, having another Elite Unit (or, possibly, two Grunt Units) in his/her army.  Perhaps, make them a support option that may take Elite loadouts.