IPB



Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Upgrading your fort?
Zagruk
post Apr 14 2011, 05:38 AM
Post #1


telescoping arm


Group: Boyz
Posts: 512
Joined: 11-November 05
From: UK
Member No.: 1,875



Been thinking of getting into this game, and reading through Da Roolz and Da Uvver Book there doesn't seem to be any option to upgrade your fort. Are there any rules for mounting gun emplacements, or spikes on the walls which cause damage to those trying to scale them, or anything?
Or, like so much of gorkamorka, do you model what features you want your fort to have?


--------------------
QUOTE (Boss Gobbstompa @ Feb 27 2011, 09:26 PM) *
...my boyz are immune to lascannon shots, as long as the lascannon is shooting something else.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nemesis
post Apr 14 2011, 05:52 AM
Post #2


Puffball Fungus


Group: Grotz
Posts: 13
Joined: 10-March 11
Member No.: 12,241



QUOTE (Zagruk @ Apr 14 2011, 12:38 PM) *
Been thinking of getting into this game, and reading through Da Roolz and Da Uvver Book there doesn't seem to be any option to upgrade your fort. Are there any rules for mounting gun emplacements, or spikes on the walls which cause damage to those trying to scale them, or anything?
Or, like so much of gorkamorka, do you model what features you want your fort to have?


There dosen't exist any rules to upgrading your fort as far as i know of. But i think its a good idea to some fan made rules.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lord_blackfang
post Apr 14 2011, 07:06 AM
Post #3


Runtherd
Group Icon

Group: Boyz
Posts: 325
Joined: 4-September 07
Member No.: 4,885



Sounds like a good idea for house rules.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Da Bikers
post Apr 14 2011, 07:41 AM
Post #4


Grot Orderly


Group: Boyz
Posts: 184
Joined: 23-August 10
From: England, Kent
Member No.: 11,791



Yeah I agree, also if you have an upgraded fort and then you lose it in a battle that could mean you lose your upgrades and the opponent earns even more teef which could balance out making siege battles so much harder for them.


--------------------
(\__/)
(='.'=) This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny into your
(")_(") signature to help him gain world domination.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Burnface
post Apr 16 2011, 11:34 PM
Post #5


Speckled Bloodshade Fungus


Group: Grotz
Posts: 24
Joined: 2-November 10
Member No.: 11,929



We made a rule that stated you could mount weapons like trukks and trakks. Same cost however we're still deciding if we should allow more than one. My vote is yes but with a ninety degree fire arc on each.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ryan
post Apr 17 2011, 06:50 AM
Post #6


Gnasher (face eater)


Group: Grotz
Posts: 84
Joined: 1-January 11
Member No.: 12,063



its a nice idea but unbalances the game, without looking at the book doesn't the defender already only bottle after 50% casualties compared to the attackers 25% then you want to throw heavy weapons at them too?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Burnface
post Apr 17 2011, 09:46 PM
Post #7


Speckled Bloodshade Fungus


Group: Grotz
Posts: 24
Joined: 2-November 10
Member No.: 11,929



I can't say I agree. I find the fort more then make sup for the percentage diff. I mean if you only have four super kitted dudes I could understand but I've found that having the fort itse;f just makes life easier. One thing that was brought up when I talked about thsi worry was making it harder to do. Like finding a way to get a Mek to come all the way out to your fort and "Konvert it's strappy bitz" to make it fit on your fort.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ryan
post Apr 19 2011, 05:13 PM
Post #8


Gnasher (face eater)


Group: Grotz
Posts: 84
Joined: 1-January 11
Member No.: 12,063



i think your missing my point, yes the fort dose make it easier, plus the defender only makes bottle checks after 50% casualties (plus dosnt need to start making checks till one reenforcement group turns up)

i just think arming them with a heavy shoota as well would totally unbalance things, although i can see ways round it, not everyone would, and multiple big weapons mounted on a fort would just be "fortress of doom" lol, think its also worth meansioning that forts are used for rescue senarios where ur only meant to start with d3 warriors, while the attacker is on foot!......bugger trying to rescue anyone if your askin me to charge down a heavy shoota dakka.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Da Bikers
post Apr 22 2011, 06:48 AM
Post #9


Grot Orderly


Group: Boyz
Posts: 184
Joined: 23-August 10
From: England, Kent
Member No.: 11,791



Ryan does have a point - I think that the battles could become too unbalanced to the defender, also there would have to be restrictions on how much you can put on the fort because it could make rescue scenarios imposable. 'Fortress of doom' reminds me of the TUGS article on Doom Fortress Syndrome. While this is not exactly the same it does highlight one of the main points - adding upgrades to your fort could make it too powerful to work well in the game. Having said that I do think that some upgrades on the fort could be good to have some upgrades, like one big gun. Perhaps if it makes the fort too powerful it could be balanced out by making the big gun bolted to the fort dodgy (e.g. quickly strapped on by a mek who didn't really want to be there and neglected through sand storms etc.).
To summarise the above ramble I think that adding too much to a fort could overpower it and thus spoil the game, although limited customisation could be beneficial to the game if controlled.


--------------------
(\__/)
(='.'=) This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny into your
(")_(") signature to help him gain world domination.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Flamekebab
post Apr 22 2011, 07:56 AM
Post #10


Tankbusta Boy


Group: Boyz
Posts: 433
Joined: 4-November 09
From: Cambridge, UK
Member No.: 10,900



It's worth noting that a fixed weapon on the fort is fixed - a vehicle can move, but (most) forts can't. It should be possible to just go behind it.

I do like the "strapped on" idea - perhaps giving it -1 to hit?


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zagruk
post Apr 26 2011, 08:37 AM
Post #11


telescoping arm


Group: Boyz
Posts: 512
Joined: 11-November 05
From: UK
Member No.: 1,875



Been pondering some more, and wondered what you'd say to mounting a maximum of two big guns (or linked normal guns) on the gate, each with a ninety degree line of sight as per weapons on vehicles. It just doesn't seem right to not have guns on an ork fort, especially on the part which is vulnerable.
The guns would be effectively useless once the enemy got inside, and would only be able to fire at targets directly approaching the gate.
Seem fair?


--------------------
QUOTE (Boss Gobbstompa @ Feb 27 2011, 09:26 PM) *
...my boyz are immune to lascannon shots, as long as the lascannon is shooting something else.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Da Bikers
post Apr 29 2011, 02:53 PM
Post #12


Grot Orderly


Group: Boyz
Posts: 184
Joined: 23-August 10
From: England, Kent
Member No.: 11,791



Hmm... It doesn't seem that great to me on first thoughts because it would make it impossible for anything to approach the gate head on so no one would attempt it, meaning that everybody would just scale the walls around the big guns making them pointless, meaning that all it would do is limit the number of tactics which could be used. Having said this I can see what you’re thinking - it does seem wrong that there are no weapons on the fought, my opinion is that two could make it too powerful. This could be dealt with by either limiting it to one big gun (although that seems a little boring to me), by limiting their power by adding modifiers such as -1 to hit or by having rules which mean that if a player has them on their fought they have greater risks such as if they bottle out they lose the big guns and the other mob can earn extra teef by scrapping them or if they get destroyed they could explode and damage the fought itself and the owning mob will have to pay for repairs. This would mean they could be used with more flexibility and so be more exciting.
That's my initial splurge of ideas anyway - what does everyone else think?


--------------------
(\__/)
(='.'=) This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny into your
(")_(") signature to help him gain world domination.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Flamekebab
post Apr 29 2011, 03:00 PM
Post #13


Tankbusta Boy


Group: Boyz
Posts: 433
Joined: 4-November 09
From: Cambridge, UK
Member No.: 10,900



I'm going to put some proper thought into this and others starting from the middle of next week. I think a suitable rule set could be developed by some of us at tUGS without too much trouble. I'm on the cusp of finishing this dissertation that has been a mill stone around my neck for most of the six months so I'll actually be free to do GoMo stuff without the inevitable guilt I suffer from procrastinating!


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zagruk
post Apr 30 2011, 04:33 PM
Post #14


telescoping arm


Group: Boyz
Posts: 512
Joined: 11-November 05
From: UK
Member No.: 1,875



How about the guns have a minimum range, representing the blind spot the gunner would have if the attackers were to hug the wall? That way you could time/position your rams/assaults against the gate to completely avoid the line of fire.
It would be a little trickier, but not particularly game breaking I'm sure.


--------------------
QUOTE (Boss Gobbstompa @ Feb 27 2011, 09:26 PM) *
...my boyz are immune to lascannon shots, as long as the lascannon is shooting something else.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Flamekebab
post Apr 30 2011, 06:39 PM
Post #15


Tankbusta Boy


Group: Boyz
Posts: 433
Joined: 4-November 09
From: Cambridge, UK
Member No.: 10,900



QUOTE (Zagruk @ Apr 30 2011, 10:33 PM) *
How about the guns have a minimum range, representing the blind spot the gunner would have if the attackers were to hug the wall? That way you could time/position your rams/assaults against the gate to completely avoid the line of fire.
It would be a little trickier, but not particularly game breaking I'm sure.

I like the idea of blind spots, could be an interesting idea!


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Da Bikers
post May 1 2011, 11:00 AM
Post #16


Grot Orderly


Group: Boyz
Posts: 184
Joined: 23-August 10
From: England, Kent
Member No.: 11,791



Me too, I like the idea


--------------------
(\__/)
(='.'=) This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny into your
(")_(") signature to help him gain world domination.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ols_faust_17
post Apr 30 2012, 06:44 AM
Post #17


Mushling


Group: Grotz
Posts: 29
Joined: 3-July 11
Member No.: 12,494



How about the only weapon available for fort mounted weapons be a flamer (mad max 2 style) and if its destroyed there be a possibility of taking the wall/gate etc. out with it (the fuel tank rupturing perhaps).


EDIT: Wow, just read when the last post was made in here, exactly a year ago...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Flamekebab
post Apr 30 2012, 09:29 AM
Post #18


Tankbusta Boy


Group: Boyz
Posts: 433
Joined: 4-November 09
From: Cambridge, UK
Member No.: 10,900



I think a set of rules for fort upgrades would be interesting. I'm busy learning to sculpt at the moment and GoMo dev work is on hiatus so I won't be the one writing said rules. However if someone were to write them up I could do the publishing layouty stuff and put it up on tUGS.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version |  Time is now: 20th April 2014 - 09:54 PM