Tactical Principals

[radioKAOS]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

Which reminds me' date=' so you pay the END on a Haymaker (or any maneuver for that matter) when you begine the maneuver, or when it's completed (or rolled for, in the case of escapes)? This could have a significent effect on the use of Haymakers used in Segment 12 if you pay the END then get the recovery, but the other guy gets his REC before taking the damage.[/quote']

 

I'm pretty certain that you pay the END [and make the attack roll] during the phase you declare it, ie phase 12.

 

It's a two edged sword. The attacker doesn't get the free REC either' date=' and if it's one of those high END attacks or Rapid Fire/Sweep he's SOL.[/quote']

 

Not true. p361 5ER:

 

"A character who Holds his Action on Segment 12 still gets his Post-Segment 12 Recovery, and may use his Held Action in the next Turnon any Segment until a Segment in which he has another Phase."

[Dust Raven]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

I'm pretty certain that you pay the END [and make the attack roll] during the phase you declare it' date=' ie phase 12. [/quote']

So you have to make an attack roll on a target that might not be there when you actually attack? That seems a bit harsh for a measly 4 DC, especially when you have to wait for it to land anyway, and take a massive hit to DCV.

 

 

 

Not true. p361 5ER:

 

"A character who Holds his Action on Segment 12 still gets his Post-Segment 12 Recovery, and may use his Held Action in the next Turnon any Segment until a Segment in which he has another Phase."

 

How does that make what I said not true?

 

Segment 12

Guy holds his action.

Post Segment 12

Guy get his REC

Segment 1

Guy uses action.

[radioKAOS]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

So you have to make an attack roll on a target that might not be there when you actually attack? That seems a bit harsh for a measly 4 DC' date=' especially when you have to wait for it to land anyway, and take a massive hit to DCV.[/quote']

 

*shrug* Take it up with Steve

 

How does that make what I said not true?

 

Segment 12

Guy holds his action.

Post Segment 12

Guy get his REC

Segment 1

Guy uses action.

 

I read you wrong.

 

I thought you meant that because the attacker was performing an action that cost him END, he would not get his REC for P-S12.

[pointyman2000]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

Wow, excellent work, Killer Shrike.

 

As a relatively new GM to the game, I'm in dire need of stuff like this.

[radioKAOS]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

Which reminds me' date=' so you pay the END on a Haymaker (or any maneuver for that matter) when you begine the maneuver, or when it's completed (or rolled for, in the case of escapes)? This could have a significent effect on the use of Haymakers used in Segment 12 if you pay the END then get the recovery, but the other guy gets his REC before taking the damage.[/quote']

 

Seg 12: Pay END for Haymaker [note that it would be the same END without the Haymaker]

PS 12: Attacker and Defender get Post Segment 12 REC

Seg 1: Haymaker lands

 

But how would this affect the use of haymakers?

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

Wow, excellent work, Killer Shrike.

 

As a relatively new GM to the game, I'm in dire need of stuff like this.

Thanx! If there are things that you, as a relatively new GM to the game, think need more addressing by all means share your thoughts as well. It might inspire some of us to write something to suit.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

Seg 12: Pay END for Haymaker [note that it would be the same END without the Haymaker]

PS 12: Attacker and Defender get Post Segment 12 REC

Seg 1: Haymaker lands

 

But how would this affect the use of haymakers?

 

The attacker would get his END back with the Post Seg12 REC, but the target has already has his REC when he taks the damage. This is as opposed to using a standard attack, in which case the target takes the damage, then gets a REC.

[radioKAOS]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

The attacker would get his END back with the Post Seg12 REC' date=' but the target has already has his REC when he taks the damage. This is as opposed to using a standard attack, in which case the target takes the damage, then gets a REC.[/quote']

 

From the standpoint of a manner of 'adding another attack into a turn' I would agree.

[Gary]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

It's a two edged sword. The attacker doesn't get the free REC either' date=' and if it's one of those high END attacks or Rapid Fire/Sweep he's SOL.[/quote']

 

 

Based on lots of actual gaming experience, this hurts the defender a lot more than the attacker. Generally it takes 2-4 hits to take out non-bricks, and the attacker usually has End for 6-12 shots at least (and can burn Stun for more). So recovery of Stun is much more vital than End.

[pointyman2000]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

Since we're on the subject of tactics, what tactics would you recommend for characters to cope with opponent with higher Speed?

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

Since we're on the subject of tactics' date=' what tactics would you recommend for characters to cope with opponent with higher Speed?[/quote']

Depends on the character really.

 

However, there's an important concept of "significant actions" that Ill probably be putting together an article on soon that deals with the idea that not all actions are equal.

 

Quality over quantity in other words.

 

If you provide two different characters, one with higher speed than the other, I could look at them and give suggestions.

 

 

 

This isnt a supergood example since the SPD difference isnt tremendous, but here is a fight between a character with a 5 SPD and a character with a 6 SPD:

 

http://www.herocentral.net/readStoryThread.htm?postId=390487&campaignId=301376

 

Here is the 6 SPD character, CRUX:

http://www.killershrike.com/MillennialMen/CharacterFiles/crux.HTML

 

 

and here is the 5 SPD character, John Wrath:

http://www.killershrike.com/MillennialMen/CharacterFiles/John%20Wrath,%20Solo%20Avenger.HTML

 

Wrath has about 80 points on Crux, but on the otherhand all of that is sunk into skills and perks that have no bearing on combat so combat wise they are roughly equivalent characters though Wrath has the edge due to having more Skill Levels.

 

Anyway, without getting into a blow by blow, Wrath took more significant actions and won the fight without a scratch. Partly this was due to Wrath being played by an experienced player and Crux being played by a neophyte, but it basically boiled down to Wrath was used more efficiently, and used more of his abilities effectively.

[Gary]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

Crux should've continually aborted to desolid whenever attacked. Having a 15 ED vs 87 active point energy attacks and lower CVs means his only chance is to force Wrath to use up his charges and then eventually grab a lamppost or bench to nail the sucker.

 

With his superior speed, he can always make sure that Wrath never hits. Most likely, the fight will end in a stalemate if Crux is played smart.

 

Incidentally, I highly disagree that the 2 characters are roughly equivalent power. Wrath has higher attacks, defenses, and CVs. Crux doesn't stand a chance without the desolidification.

[pointyman2000]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

Wow. I should read up on more of these. I got lost halfway through the fight. No wonder my more tactically inclined players are running circles around my NPCs.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

Crux should've continually aborted to desolid whenever attacked. Having a 15 ED vs 87 active point energy attacks and lower CVs means his only chance is to force Wrath to use up his charges and then eventually grab a lamppost or bench to nail the sucker.

 

With his superior speed, he can always make sure that Wrath never hits. Most likely, the fight will end in a stalemate if Crux is played smart.

 

Incidentally, I highly disagree that the 2 characters are roughly equivalent power. Wrath has higher attacks, defenses, and CVs. Crux doesn't stand a chance without the desolidification.

 

Agreed, Crux could have been played much smarter. As I noted, the player was new. Wrath was also much more salty with 27 (often long) sessions behind him, while Crux had zero. There's no question about it, Wrath is the more powerful, well rounded character.

 

What I meant was they had spent roughly equivalent points on combat. Its not as one sided as you make it sound however. For starters if Crux got Wrath in a grab it would be all over. For seconders Wraths gun is OAF and though Crux isnt particularly good at disarming, once he had Wrath wrapped up he could have taken it away. Crux was strong enough to use a bench or pole as a weapon, which would have canceled Wrath's high DCV and could have forced him to Abort to D4C at some point, falling to 1/2 DCV and becoming vulnerable to a grab; once grabbed his combat luck would stop working and from there it would be a short fight.

 

Wrath definitely had a strong advantage, but it wasnt a hopeless fight by any stretch.

[Gary]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

Agreed, Crux could have been played much smarter. As I noted, the player was new. Wrath was also much more salty with 27 (often long) sessions behind him, while Crux had zero. There's no question about it, Wrath is the more powerful, well rounded character.

 

What I meant was they had spent roughly equivalent points on combat. Its not as one sided as you make it sound however. For starters if Crux got Wrath in a grab it would be all over. For seconders Wraths gun is OAF and though Crux isnt particularly good at disarming, once he had Wrath wrapped up he could have taken it away. Crux was strong enough to use a bench or pole as a weapon, which would have canceled Wrath's high DCV and could have forced him to Abort to D4C at some point, falling to 1/2 DCV and becoming vulnerable to a grab; once grabbed his combat luck would stop working and from there it would be a short fight.

 

Wrath definitely had a strong advantage, but it wasnt a hopeless fight by any stretch.

 

The trouble is that between the Find Weakness and the Variable Advantage, Wrath is quite likely to one shot Crux with his 15 ED. And with his large CV advantage, it should be relatively easy to get that hit unless Crux constantly aborts.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

The trouble is that between the Find Weakness and the Variable Advantage' date=' Wrath is quite likely to one shot Crux with his 15 ED. And with his large CV advantage, it should be relatively easy to get that hit unless Crux constantly aborts.[/quote']

Right, which is where his 1 extra SPD steps in and gives Crux a chance to break out of the vicious cycle. The player failed to capitalize on it, and correspondingly never laid a finger on Wrath.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

One thing you're assuming here Gary is that each character knows how the other is built. Wrath doesn't know Crux has a 15ED, for all he knows it's a 55ED.

 

What you know of your opponant plays as big a role as what you know you're capable of.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

One thing you're assuming here Gary is that each character knows how the other is built. Wrath doesn't know Crux has a 15ED, for all he knows it's a 55ED.

 

What you know of your opponant plays as big a role as what you know you're capable of.

Also true.

[Kabluey]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

I'm pretty certain that you pay the END [and make the attack roll] during the phase you declare it' date=' ie phase 12. [/quote']

 

This is not correct. On p. 389 of 5ER, it states that you don't actually launch the attack until the segment after you declare it, and pay endurance only when it is actually launched.

 

For example:

Segment 12: Player announces haymaker.

Segment 1: Attack launches, pays END.

 

The text doesn't specify when you make the attack roll, but I think it pretty strongly implies that it's made in the segment when it is launched, i.e., the second segment.

 

When I read what you'd said, it just sounded kind of off, so I went and checked. I will say that I think the text is poorly worded and could easily be confusing.

[Gary]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

One thing you're assuming here Gary is that each character knows how the other is built. Wrath doesn't know Crux has a 15ED, for all he knows it's a 55ED.

 

What you know of your opponant plays as big a role as what you know you're capable of.

 

 

This actually works against Crux in this scenario. If he doesn't know that Wrath has FW and 87 active point energy attacks, there would be no reason for him to abort every phase to Desolid. And then get hammered by the first shot.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

Slight quibble but Wrath's EB is really effectively 75 Active Points (the remainder going to the overhead for Variable Advantage), but the difference in this case is negligible.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

I had a look through the combat that you ran and the characters Crux and Wrath. Nicely done.

 

One long term topic is some sort of combat effectiveness scale - there a number of calculators out there, but I've never been convinced it is all that necessary.

 

Crux has a base CV of 8, as does Wrath.

 

Both have martial arts. Crux has a one point speed advantage.

 

Wrath has 6 combat levels, Crux has 3. That is quite a big difference.

 

Crux has a BIG damage potential: 16-18 d6, averaging 56-63 STUN. That is a LOT. One hit would take Wrath down, unless he was able to abort to a successful roll with punch. He needs to grab first and his best manouvre to do that is the grappling block (a little dodgy in itself - I did not think that you should have an offensive and defensive base for a martial manouvre, but we'll let that one slide.) This is +1 OCV, for a max OCV of 12, while maintaining a DCV of 8. Wrath can maintain an OCV of 8 and a DCV of 14 against HtH even when not using martial arts. Martial arts (apart from dodge) are of limtied use against someone with that kind of stretching.

 

Wrath's best attack is his Peacemaker, on autofire, delivering 3x10d6 energy. one solid hit with this will do (on average) 20 stun through Crux's defences even before find weakness. Three hits will be enough to take down Crux. Hitting three times with the autofire requires a roll of 10 or less, assuming his three OLs are OCV and Crux is not doing anything defensive (only one of his levels could count anyway, and none of his martial arts).

 

It is one of those interesting combats: Crux, if he gets lucky, could take Wrath down in two phases (hit and then damage), Wrath could, if he gets lucky, take Crux down in 1 or 2 phases (depending on how solid the autofire hit is).

 

Of course this is where combat tactics come in: Crux could have used his speed to better effect, and, one has to wonder, if he had not been calling out his hit rolls, whether Wrath would really have aborted to a dodge when he'd rolled 4: he may well have considered himself safe and thereby been sunk. Crux needs an 8- to hit a non-dodging Wrath. Not uncommon but not something you can rely on...

 

This doesn't even cover the options: Crux would probably have been far better using his desolid than his force wall (and, given that most of his normal in-combat defences are non-resistant, would have been better off building his lack of weakness to cover his normal defences).

 

Despite the points advantage, even taking non-combat skills into account, I'd probably have bet on Crux, but I would not have wagered a lot.

 

OK, I'm just regurgitating here, but it does show the improtance of tactics and of luck, and of a little known but really quite important proverb:

 

The mouth is the enemy of the neck.

 

In this case that means don't shoult out what you've rolled until the other fella decides if he is going to abort.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

One thing you're assuming here Gary is that each character knows how the other is built. Wrath doesn't know Crux has a 15ED, for all he knows it's a 55ED.

 

What you know of your opponant plays as big a role as what you know you're capable of.

 

 

This is a really important point.

 

In most combats you give out a lot of information about the abilities of opponents

 

I've run combats where no information is given out about mechanics, including what was rolled to hit, except 'results' - a subjective view or whether they hit easily, and of course, their damage results. Your own damage results are described as well:

 

0-10% damage through: basically the target ignores the blow/doesn't react

10-25% target winces but keeps coming

25-50% target hesistates: clearly felt that one land

50%+ target probably stunned anyway...

 

Of course you can use acting to make an opponent think a blow is more or less effective...

 

It does make a real difference to the flow of combat when players only know the numbers on one side...players tedn to be more extreme - far more cautious or far more foolhardy...

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

Good analysis Sean, and I basically agree with everything you said except that I would still give the edge to Wrath based upon his extral CL's and because he's more flexible than Crux, having more options.

 

As to your quibble on Grappling Block, you'll have to take that up with Steve L. -- it's from the UMA.

 

I've also asked some questions about it here:

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33308&highlight=grappling

 

and here:

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33314&highlight=grappling

[CBikle]

Re: Tactical Principals

 

Not bad.

 

One thing you might consider changing would be to place more emphasis on the role-playing considerations section to encourage new players to play their characters as opposed to "playing the system" (although that's not usually a concern with new players anyway).

 

There's a tone with some of the text that comes off a little hostile ("Don't Be Lazy", "Read The Damn Book") that was probably just intended to be humorous, but makes Hero System seem like a "job". I would definitely change that if I were using the pages as hand-outs for a demo-game. Maybe something along the lines of: "Be Prepared" might work better ?

 

I also think that Tactical Principals for HERO could work as a generic guideline for players new to RPGs, Hero System or otherwise.

 

Good work.