Had a friend (Richard, who did the monte carlo simulations previously) over to do a playtest of PMIM. We played two games, using the Take and Hold scenario presented earlier. I took a balanced force: a Timber Wolf and a Vinge, two Tyrants, two Mammoths, three GEVs, three units of infantry, two Beetles, and two units of ODA, with a mix of anti-tank, anti-light, and anti-infantry weapons.
The first game, he went with a heavy composition: a Timber Wolf, a Vinge, seven Tyrants, and two Mammoths, armed with a mix of heavy autocannons and particle beams. That heavy composition had a pretty clear edge over my balanced composition when it comes to combat, but I won by victory points - GEVs can jump from their starting position to the capture zone in the first round, and that, combined with more units to seize points in the midgame, gave me enough of an edge to hit 10VP before my forces were quite wiped out. One major factor in this game was the fact that not all of my units could actually damage any of his units; my infantry had lasers and the Beetles were armed with LAC, with STR 1 and 2 respectively.
The second game, he took a Mjolnir with a gauss and a heavy particle beam and a Paladin with a heavy particle beam and a heavy autocannon as his Warmechs, filling the rest of his ponts with infantry and ODA units, armed with a mix of light autocannons and light plasmas. His first shot on my Timber Wolf took its left arm with the Gauss Gun out, and it was all downhill from there - I didn’t have much in the way of long-range anti-tank that could push for his Warmechs, so he was able to pick most of my vehicles apart before I could get in to hit his mechs, and he outnumbered me with infantry by a fair bit. I’m not sure how the game would have gone otherwise, or if dual 15-ton guns on my Timber Wolf would have made it easier to cope with an early weapon loss.
Overall, balance seemed pretty good, although that was partly down to the scenario rules disadvantaging the low number of units in the tank-heavy composition.
Timber Wolves might be undercosted, but I’d need to look at some alternate 12-point mechs to really decide that (and mech costs don’t have much to do with the costs of other units - the Timber Wolf is probably stronger than a pair of Tyrants, especially since it can take the Gauss Gun).
Light Lasers seem a little weak, but it’s hard to see what to do to buff them without stepping on something else’s toes; 4REP would be an instagib on infantry, a range increase would be put them at a longer range than anything else, and a damage increase would make them stronger than the LAC.
The Mjolnir seemed to be more effective than the Paladin, though that might just be because the Paladin didn’t bring its HAC into play consistently. I’m inclined to think that the Mjolnir should be an 18-point unit, since the heavy particle and Gauss gun combination was extremely effective.
I’m considering adding a requirement to take some light units in certain scenarios. Take and Hold nerfs the all-Tyrants strategy by making unit count matter for victory points, but all-Mammoths would create the same issues for an army that takes some STR 1 or 2 weapons, while putting a few more tanks on the table. I’m not sure how that would have affected the game; Richard would have had to make some tradeoffs, but APDS might have worked as well as the HPB and HAC lineup did, once you account for the 50% more shots being fired.
We noticed that I hadn’t revised the Heavy Mech defense values in the last rules update. That was a mistake on my part, but I’m not sure I shouldn’t just leave them at 6 DEF to keep them killable.
Richard also convinced me to rename Particle Cannons to Particle Beams. That means there’s a unique acronym for every weapon without needing to get creative.
I should be posting a revised ruleset in the next couple days; I’m hoping to get some of the bullet points I had in the first rules post turned into prose.
No comments:
Post a Comment