Nihila wrote:As I'm sure Twoy will tell you a thousand times, the bigger the map is, the worse things get for you.
You've missed the point, if you want a two sides trying to capture each others base camps they need to be more than 1 turns move away from each other - hence bigger maps
Nihila wrote:And, terrain features would make it even worse. Imagine if there were mountains, and WaterMonkey used those as a base for his fliers. With no fliers in the MCC:S except the scouts, you'd be booped. If he had 4 mountains scattered around the map, he could feasibly hit anything from them with impunity.
If there had been mountains and other terrain features, chances are we've had designed our forces differently. Secondly a mountain only gives a flier an effective range of 2 in a radius around the mountain (remembering that the unit needs to return to the mountain to be safe, and it takes 2 move to enter the mountain hex). If Watermonkey designed a map so that every non mountain hex was within two move of a mountain hex, then I'd never want to play any of Watermonkey's games, because that would be rubbish GMing.
Nihila wrote:And, well, if you really want your 200 or 250 points of units to auto-engage a Diwigible, that's your prerogative. I will point out that the Diwigible has far less attack than 422 points worth of, say, Sniper Cats, so you might be able to slowly take it down, even though it will have massive retaliation.
I've got a free unit type slot, I'd just design a unit capable of wiping out the diwigible... Missing the point though the issue was with the initial set up. It doesn't work if we're actually expected to have to defend our base camp in order to not auto-lose.
Nihila wrote:I remain convinced that the Diwigible is a flaw in BLAND's cost formula, but whatever.
Bland's formula was designed with the 30 Hit limit in mind, if you're going to exceed that limit I'm not surprised you're finding problems - hence a pointless test. I'd agree though that flyers are too cheap in his formula*.
Nihila wrote:He would have waited for a ranged stack to get a bit too close, then fielded some Heavy Archers to take down the special bonus, then hit it with a pair of Diwigibles. Ranged stack vanishes. Rinse and repeat.
Or just made a melee stack disappear suddenly.
So yes if you keep a broken rule breaking unit it'll cause problems, what's the point? Also I think you'd find we have stacked intelligently, the whole point of the Bwoodwiders was to surround them with other units, not to leave them on their own to be picked off at will, that would just be stupid on our part.
Plus if the did diwigible drop in heavy archers it would give us a very smaller set of possible locations for the diwigible to be hidden in (think of the dragon hunts from TBfGB1). Or if we get rid of diwigibles (because they are broken) he'll need 8 dragons (568 points worth) to be able to move those 8 heavy archers.
Look if you want a base camp versus base camp style fight, you need a separate GM I think perfect visibility and an offensive goal is too strong a combination. It works fine when crafting a challenging scenario for a group of players, but only if the goal for the GM is to make a fun/challenging scenario, not to defeat the players. Which is the mistake Watermonkey seems to be making, while you have mostly avoided it Nihila.
To clarify there's the difference between a GM crafting difficult challenge the players can lose, and the GM's beating the players. I prefer the former to the latter.
*As an aside, I'd be more inclined to have larger maps and movements of
Garrison 0 move
Siege 1 move
Infantry 3 move
Calvary 6 move
Flying 10 move
This would also have the advantage of making flying units twice as expensive, and push sides into relying primarily on siege and infantry for efficiency.
With this I'd suggest a map with 30 hexes between the two base camps, joined by a road so you'd be looking at 3 turns for flyers to make the journey, 5 for cavalry, 8 for infantry and 15 for siege. With flyers being so expensive comparatively, you'd have to be much more careful about how you use them.