With no game this week and not much on the painting table at present I thought I'd spend a little time musing on the scenarios that are included with the Firefight rules. The book contains eight competitive scenarios and eight narrative ones. I'll concentrate on the competitive ones as they are designed to be more balanced and are likely to be the ones you'll see at competitions.
The scenarios fall into three categories, Kill, Objective control, and Area control.
Starting with the Kill scenarios we have Meeting Engagement & Last Stand, to win in these scenarios you need to have out-killed your opponent by >10% of the starting value of the armies. Last Stand adds the twist of only half your units starting on the table and the others arriving on Turns 2 & 3.
I wasn't a fan of the Kill scenario in Kings of War as I didn't think it resulted in very interesting game play and as I'll most likely be using a melee army (my Veer-myn) for most/all of my Firefight games then I'm not sure I'll enjoy it in Firefight either. With no incentive to move forwards these scenario's should favour shooting armies who will be more than happy to hang back and shoot off whatever they can see. Advancing into the enemy killing zones as a melee army when the shooters are more than happy to keep backing up isn't much fun generally.
Refused Flank is a hybrid scenario that sits between Kill and Objective control. Six objectives are placed on the table and these are worth 100 points each at the end of the game to be added to your kill points total. To win you need to have out 'killed' your opponent by >10% of the starting value of the armies.
It's said of Kings of War games that everyone plays the first 4 turns as Kill and then starts to worry about the scenario condition from turn 5 onwards, this is a scenario that fits perfectly into this. It will be interesting to see if players concentrate on the Kill aspect of this and then look at the Objective part in turns 4 & 5 in Firefight.
We then have three Objective only scenarios Control the Intel (D4+2), Take & Hold (7), & Stop the Signal (D4+1). Unlike the Objective scenarios in KoW points are scored at the end of each round in Firefight for the objectives you hold. This could mean that some games are effectively over before the full five rounds are up. I would expect in a competition you may score more tournament points for a bigger points margin victory, but some work on straight win/loss so you could end up stopping play early. In Control the Intel and Stop the Signal players take turns to place the objectives in the opposing half of the table, this should mean that shooting armies are going to have to move forwards to win them. In Take & Hold the position is predetermined with two in each deployment zone and three along the centre line, the objectives in your opponents deployment zone are worth four times those in your own deployment zone.
The Objective scenarios look to be more friendly to melee based armies than the Kill ones, purely as the shooting armies need to be on the move to score victory points. As a melee army player you will want some units that can sit on back-field objectives who are either dirt cheap or who can chip in with some shooting. Scoring points on each turn (like in Deadzone) means that an aggressive player who scores heavily early on could potentially win even if they have barely any models left just because of the lead they have built up in the early turns. I've had a look and cannot see a rule to state you automatically lose a scenario if wiped out so even if you have no models left you are still in with a chance of a win.
The last two scenarios are pretty much straight out of Kings of War with Occupation being KoW Dominate and Secure the Sector being a variation of KoW Control. Secure the Sector sees both sides start with 50% of their units on the table and the rest arriving turns 2 & 3. The table is sub-divided into 24" squares with the side at the end of the game controlling the most squares (by superior unit strength) winning the scenario. As the number of squares will always be even it may have been nice to see a single Objective in the centre for tie-breaks. The objective in Occupation is to have the most Unit Strength within 12" of the centre of the table at the end of turn 5.
An interesting difference in between Firefight & KoW is the way that unit strength (US) is calculated. In KoW the unit strength is linked to the unit type and cost. So for instance a Horde of expensive infantry could be 4 US whilst a Troop of cheap infantry only 1 US. In Firefight the numerical size or cost of the unit doesn't seem to influence the US, as far as I can see only the height and unit type matter.
So for instance:
Unit of 10 Steel Warriors with dual missile launchers, 230 points, 1 US
Unit of 5 Forge Guard, 160 points, 2 US
Unit of 2 Brokkr Valkyr, 60 points, 2 US
1 Iron Ancestor, 130 points, 2 US
1 Sturnhammer Tank, 140 points, 2 US / 0 US in Beta version
Unit of 2 Rat Swarms, 35 points, 1 US
Unit of 10 Stalkers, 85 points, 1 US
Unit of 5 Nightmares, 160 points, 2 US
Unit of 2 Tunnel Runners, 160 points, 2 US
1 Tunneller, 125 points, 2 US
It will be interesting to see if the proposed drop in US for the Sturnhammer Tank is spread over to other vehicles that currently have US like Tunnellers and the Asterian flyer. If the change goes in then I think for Forge Father players they would be more likely to take Iron Ancestors over the tanks.
As we can see on a purely numbers front the side that can field cheaper units is almost certainly going to field a greater unit strength than their more elite opponents which will of course be spread across more units as well. This feels like it should be big advantage in Secure the Sector if you can keep your units alive to contest the sectors at the end of the game.
I think at an event you will want to see a spread of scenario's being played and the fact they can be split into three groups means this should easy to achieve. Two other big factors in how the scenarios will play out are the terrain on the table and how 'killy' the game is. These three factor do all feed into each other but I do have concerns about the lethality of the combat meaning that the scenario becomes a more minor consideration in the games. I really need to play more games to get a better feel of how these factors play off against each other but first impressions suggest that after 5 turns (or probably less) one side or possibly both are going to be pretty much wiped out. A lower kill rate would mean more units on the table towards the end of the game and that the amount of terrain present doesn't tip the balance between shooting and melee armies to far towards one side.
That's a question I'll need to come back to once I've had more games with different scenarios across multiple terrain densities.
No comments:
Post a Comment