It is currently Tue Oct 20, 2020 12:26 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
 Post subject: A Matter of Armor
PostPosted: Mon Apr 21, 2014 12:12 am 

Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 9:21 pm
Posts: 76
I look at older Warzone (and Chronopia since it is similar) and I see many models that range up to Armor 26, yet when I do the math it appears Armor 26 = Armor 16 in WZR.

In other words, most models in earlier editions had armor that ranges from 6-12 for most of them (the actual range is 2 to 16) yet WZR most models are 10-15 with some of them as high as 18. It would then be obvious that in general the armor saves have risen a bit.

How do I know? If you had a 16 Armor in the older game and someone attacked you with damage 8 attack you need an 8 or less. If someone attacks a model with 6 Armor and they do the same ST 8 attack you need an 8 or less.

But since most models have 10-14 it would be like most models have 20 to 24 armor in older system values. (with the range going up to 28, and perhaps if we see a model with lower than 10 Armor, then a range of olde system values like 18 to 28.

For those who care, the old Chronopia 2e went as low as 12 Armor and thus in the WZR terms that is Armor 2, and 26 Armor in the older system would be Armor 16.

Anyone else notice that?

What are your thoughts on that development? I suppose since the game got rid of range modifiers and if it raised general defensive values (armor) and since it doesn't have a Defense score that the aggregate effect is a positive one.

but I am interested in what you guys think.

I wonder what was the design reasons behind that. Perhaps the designer can make a comment as to the logic or thinking behind this. I didn't say it was bad or wrong just curious why and curious what others think.

 Post subject: Re: A Matter of Armor
PostPosted: Wed Apr 23, 2014 9:31 am 

Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 10:36 am
Posts: 58
In my opinion the older systems were more "realistic". I liked the idea, that if you are closer to the enemy it is easier to hit - like in real life. On longer distances there was even strenght of weapons decreased. Also, I liked the idea of Rocket Launchers, that were made hard to hit small models and quite easy to hit vehicles.

And like in real life, if you are hit, there is quite small chance of surviving it, and that also was quite well visible in older systems.

On the other side, the older systems of warzone allowed to put more models on the similar point cost as now. For example, in WZR game for 1000pts i put about 30-40 models in bauhaus. In 2nd edition I could put 1,5 times the models. However, the higher armour value recompensates it a bit now making that models survive more often.

The action system in older systems allowed to shoot in more convinient moments (like move-shoot-move to hide or make quite a nice barrage of fire with 3 actions) and now it requires to "face the dice consequences", as if you move and fire and do not kill opponent, you are left in place where can be shot by the opponent.
It is a different approach for strategy. I do not say it is bad. But as I mentioned - the older ones were more realistic for me.

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
skymiles_red v1.0.1 designed by Team -Programming forum-سيارات للبيع .