First play with the new rules...

[Axhead]

0) There is no line of sight in MFZ.

Which is funny because the whole setup/start of the game is predicated on the concept that stepping out of cover is stepping into sight. The "point frame" is setup "out of cover" and all other frames are setup "in cover" (offence from each other and the defender, and the final defence frames "in cover" even when out of the defensive perimiter).

It makes sence that the guy who steps into view starts the fire fight. But then, to have no "line of sight" after that moment, kind of breaks down.

I see it more being that the defenders have been in radio silence (or in some other way have not yet announced their mech signatures to satellite pick up or whatever), then on turn one they open up the poor sucker who is what the game calls the point frame, and all Ijad-non-specified-negative-after-life-place breaks loose.

[Joshua A.C. Newman]

Yeah, that's the point where they realize that someone's there. Up until then, everyone's been sneaking around slowly — at least as sneakily as a 2-ton machine can sneak — but now everyone's running and shooting and yelling.

But you'll note: your odds of hitting a target in cover when there's no one close enough to see and no sensors pointed at them is pretty low. Like, you've got your artillery firing at someone all the way across the board in cover. None of your frames are there to spot and, if you have big sensors somewhere, they're pointed elsewhere. You might get lucky, but your odds of doing even one system of damage on a defense of 4 (the average) and an attack of 5 (the average) is 1/6. That's what we call "firing blind".

[Ramcat]

1) The rules preview started damage from the bottom up, 4, 5, 6, when shooting at a target in cover. The draft (damage chart 3) has 4s and 5s hitting the cover. The whole concept of the "4, kill the cover and then a 5 would hit the target" seems to be missing from the "draft" rules. So, is this a change?

1) It's implicit. Say you shoot at a 'Frame in heavy cover and you roll 4, 5, 5. You assign the 4, it blows it down to light cover, the next 5 blow the cover away and the third 5 hits the Frame.

Ah, yes, but, as I read the "draft" rules there is no explaination of this (unless I missed it). All it says is that 4 and 5 hit cover and 6 hits the frame. It doesn't say "resolve from 4 up, with 4s and 5s hitting cover until the cover is destroyed then 5s hit the target frame (as 6s do)".

If you mean "it's implicit" in the rules - I didn't get that by reading the chart - it's not clear enough. Actually it's not in there at all (by my read).

[Ramcat]

3) A green dice gives you the ability to move through cover (page 59). What about walls higher than a frame?

3) Your Frame jumps/climbs/vaults/flys over it.

There has to be some limits to this. As an example, some apartments in the Terrain section are cover but 5 stories tall (15+ bricks high). No way a frame jumps over that in the timeframe of a turn. Especially if, that same frame, without minor upgrades (the green dice), can't step over a 3 brick wall. Or a better example, a frame with a direct fire weapon, cannot scale/jump/vault/fly over or otherwise cross a wall three bricks high, but if he drops his gun he can now leap more than his height (a wall two or three stories tall)? Just doesn't equate to any real physics.

Also, there is no movement cost to this leaping/scaling/vaulting? Such manuvers would cost time - currently as I read the rules (draft), you measure a straight line through the cover, with no reguard to how high you had to travel to get there.

[Dukayn]

The way I see it, is that with the or allowing movement through cover, is that they are mobile enough to negotiate the cover in the most efficient way. If it's very high cover then they go around it, with enough speed and efficiency to not have it chew up extra movement points. If it's lower cover then yeah they can go over it.

[Mantisking]

There has to be some limits to this. As an example, some apartments in the Terrain section are cover but 5 stories tall (15+ bricks high). No way a frame jumps over that in the timeframe of a turn. Especially if, that same frame, without minor upgrades (the green dice), can't step over a 3 brick wall. Or a better example, a frame with a direct fire weapon, cannot scale/jump/vault/fly over or otherwise cross a wall three bricks high, but if he drops his gun he can now leap more than his height (a wall two or three stories tall)? Just doesn't equate to any real physics.

Also, there is no movement cost to this leaping/scaling/vaulting? Such manuvers would cost time - currently as I read the rules (draft), you measure a straight line through the cover, with no reguard to how high you had to travel to get there.

Check page 95 in the rules preview.

[Ced23Ric]

Ah, yes, but, as I read the "draft" rules there is no explaination of this (unless I missed it). All it says is that 4 and 5 hit cover and 6 hits the frame. It doesn't say "resolve from 4 up, with 4s and 5s hitting cover until the cover is destroyed then 5s hit the target frame (as 6s do)".

True. But it also doesn't say "resolve all 5s first, then the 4s that hit the cover, then the 6s that hit the 'frame." Why wouldn't you go 4 -> 5 -> 6? It makes sense both for fluff and crunch. Crunch, you simple count upwards, fluff, you walk your fire in (I dunno if that is a paintball term, so if it is: walking in - Shooting with a stream and using the impacts to adjust aim, so the stream eventually hits the target, instead of precise aiming.).

[Joshua A.C. Newman]

If climbing matters to you, use the climbing rule. Otherwise, the frame just gets around it somehow.

[Ramcat]

Ah, yes, but, as I read the "draft" rules there is no explaination of this (unless I missed it). All it says is that 4 and 5 hit cover and 6 hits the frame. It doesn't say "resolve from 4 up, with 4s and 5s hitting cover until the cover is destroyed then 5s hit the target frame (as 6s do)".

True. But it also doesn't say "resolve all 5s first, then the 4s that hit the cover, then the 6s that hit the 'frame." Why wouldn't you go 4 -> 5 -> 6? It makes sense both for fluff and crunch. Crunch, you simple count upwards, fluff, you walk your fire in (I dunno if that is a paintball term, so if it is: walking in - Shooting with a stream and using the impacts to adjust aim, so the stream eventually hits the target, instead of precise aiming.).

What I'm pointing out is that it is missing from the rules as written, the "draft". The un-initiated (or from other game systems) will apply 4s and 5s to the cover (there or not) and 6s to the frame. 5s should count (once cover is destroyed) but will be ignored. The work from lowest dice up concept is also missing from the rules.

As for "walking in", it is as old as machine guns (I believe). I definately know of the term being used in WWII, and we used it on the M60 and M1 training courses in the 80's. Yes, I'm old.

[Ramcat]

Check page 95 in the rules preview.

Yeah, I did, and climbing wasn't the issue as the object did not have a 4X4 top, just a wall edge. But I like the one unit of measure for every six bricks high. For a six to eleven brick wall, the green dice allow me to cross at 2 points of movement (6 up, 6 down). As soon as you cross 12+ bricks its 4 points of movement, and so on at 18, 24, etc...

Also I was looking for the basic rules, not advanced, as we made no pre-game agreement.

If climbing matters to you, use the climbing rule. Otherwise, the frame just gets around it somehow.

Climbing wasn't the issue because the frame would never "sit" on the wall.

Joshua, lumpley, I don't mind the "looser" rule set. Perhaps some examples or more text to guide new readers into knowing the way they shouild be looking at the table top. Many table top gamers come from strong ruleset background and "loosening up" will take some guidance and getting used to.

[Joshua A.C. Newman]

Sounds like, yeah! Thanks for the feedback!