Hello everybody
We had our first test game on Sunday and these are a few thoughts and impressions I got from it.
We have both used an army list of the Valley Confederation, from the Core Book (p. 47), 750 points
We chose those for our first game, because the models barely have any special rules of their own, so we could concentrate more on trying out the core mechanics of the game.
My impression from this test:
The core mechanics of the game were actually so far clear to me at the end of the game. The calculation of the combat situation in a melee with multiple squads is at first sight a bit complex, but actually conclusive. This part reminds me of Warhammer Fantasy and has an "okay" complexity.
The sequence of an attack is also clear, it takes some getting used to the individual attack roll of the opponent (and to keep bonuses like the combat situation in mind) but I think that with practice and tools like profile cards of the squads, this can be done more quickly by hand. But I don't have the feeling that the game system is suitable for bigger games.
We were a bit baffled about how good shields are, especially for their 4 points. A squad with shields has practically no reason to choose non-defensive Combat Enhancements in close combat, as a +2 flat is just very good. We find it a bit odd that a squad attacking a unit is defensive because a charge tends to give +1 to infantry while the deflection bonus of the shield gives +2.
In our test this resulted in a very cheap class 1 unit looking totally exaggerated, because
1. superior in numbers (+1)
2. shields (+2)
and normally also
3. coordinated defence (+1)
and thus simply dominates other units (1st Age Maximized Combat Enhancements of 4).
We're not quite sure if the intention is that the defensive bonuses should have such a drastic effect on a unit's effectiveness. The potential +4 from the combat situation just churns in a lot of butter, which also lets weak units deal massively, which we don't think is justified.
A 8 point model (Citizen Militia of the Valley Confederation, S50 Core Book) with shield, 4 points beats with "Martial 3 + CSM 4 + W6" which results in 7+, which hits many models automatically and is hardly to save (armor throw to remind: "Toughness + armor + W6"), which we find difficult, especially with the mass of models.
But I still find the scenario rules very exciting. The way the terrain is set up, time of day and weather, the individual dice roll for primary mission objectives and the common secondary mission objective that only appears in the current game and the way the armies are set up make the game exciting and varied in my opinion. I also find the way initiative is handled quite exciting.
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
The difference between Offensive/Defensive enhancements makes the equations totally different. Seeing as Deflection is in the Defensive column you'd only be able to use your Shield bonus to CS to save against hits.
Hey Saphyron CQ
I did go over your post closely. So I pushed up the FAQ for the Core Rules yesterday that will clear up a rule to two that were not as concise or displayed as well as intended. It's on the main site here and easy to download. I think this will clear up combat.
Here is the link. There are essentially 3 entries for the Core Rules, and 2 for the Factions.
https://www.genesysgames.com/playing-the-game-faqs
There are actually two new areas on the site, but the FAQ one was most important to get up. The other is on creating factions.
The primary part which is in the Errata, is that Offensive Enhancements are applied to attack rolls, and Defensive Enhancements are applied to saves from being wounded.
Again as Danny said above, you always compare the two combat situations of you and your opponent. So I mine was 4, and yours was 2, that would give me a +2 bonus to my die rolls (to attacks if I chosen to go offensive or to saves if I had chosen to go defensive.)
My thoughts are to use the Children of the Forests against the Valley Confederation to compare and see what you think. "the Children of the Forests are very offensive based and can be played like a glass cannon type of army". The Karthru'ak Empire would also be a good solid one to use (and maybe easier to play if a Glass Cannon is not your army type).
Just some added info and something we are working on "Combat Encyclopedia" that will be free for everyone.
I think you will find the choices you have to make really define how your squads will work tactically on the tabletop. Going defensive will keep you alive a longer, going offensive will help remove enemy models faster. On the table, you will find a lot of classes configured to go one way or the other.
When said, looking at combat this way there are definite advantages to getting these bonuses, like gaining Increases to Strength is generally cheaper in the game.
Ive been working on a Combat Encyclopedia. This is from the playtesters on just how to design classes to get the most out of combat. Because of Covid 19, this is way behind, as it was supposed to be available as people got their books. We simply cannot get together yet and email/phone is not working efficiently for this.
It shows just how varied combat can be. (this is not an excerpt, I just briefly am going over some of the concepts).
Here is a brief on some of the concepts.
Types of Melee combatants
Defensive: A good way to go to take and hold tabletop positions, claim objectives, and over all stay alive! Downsides being that it can be difficult to take down the enemy.
Class Ideas and concepts
Skilled Weapon+Shield combatants: Good bonuses plus and decent armor tend to hold the lines very well. Best way to do this is with a decent Martial characteristic since you will not be getting bonuses to hit.
Spear and Shield: Mean to hold lines with the ability to strike first in a charging situation.
Offensive: There are a couple types here to get big enhancements for the combat situation. Getting attacked while exhausted though is the drawback and these squads need support! or getting flanked and hit can become cause dramatic losses
Strength Based: To get big bonuses Strength is one of the less expensive ways to go on Traits. Getting a bonus here means a solid bonus when you are charging, or locked in combat.
Mounted Cavalry: this can really maximize your combat situation and the poor soul who is exhausted and then hit by mounted troops creates havoc. Mounted types of tend to always want to have at least Trample 1 available. This allows them to charge through an enemy squad that is trying to speedbump you. Lances are a great weapon here to help against squads with spears.
Chargers: These can be Berserkers types or etc, that get bonuses on the charge. Speed and stealth gets these up and personal and often rely upon both strength and additional charging bonuses.
Neither Offensive or Defensive (or both)
Coordinated Veterans: This concept is one of the most flexible because in the following rounds you can switch back and forth between offensive and defensive. This reduces the number of models attacking by 2, so there is that. War Veterans ability helps this but tends to be expensive in point costs.
Dual Weapons: This is a great way to go, but it only enhances your Martial skill so will not be helping your Combat Situation. So can be flexible for both offensive and defensive or not relying upon the combat situation as much (note: that an enhancement to martial does not raise your target numbers - Mtn)
Mobs: These can go either way depending on they are built. Just remember that you need a lot of miniatures to rely upon these bonuses. Killing mobs is a lot of fun with some heavy calvary.... charging, trampling, and lots of models going away with so many attacks coming in. So be aware that trampling cavalry can be a huge problem, not to mention losing so many models makes easy to finally break your morale. (a downside to mobs).
These lists are not completely comprehensive. More details and example builds will be in the encyclopedia.
I see this post hasn't been commented on yet. I've been hesistant because I'm not an expert myself. But I'll give it a shot. I've played 2 virtual games via TTS with a mate of mine who used the example Faction Liktnis Scuttlers. I played with my own crafted Reptilia Faction. The 1st game I lost horribly. Then I adjusted my faction. And the 2nd game I won. You see, you need these dry test runs to adjust your factions and create this balanced local meta. We didn't use Shields unfortunately.
So after reading your post I had a couple of questions/remarks:
P17 rulebook, Deflection: "...if the model has not already been activated." & p116 1st Age book, Shields: "Active/Passive Deflection Bonus" --> This ensures it's not always possible to gain +2 bonus from a Shield, were you guys always making sure you had or was using an action?
P16 rulebook, "...with the player that has the most enhancements gaining the difference to apply to their attack rolls." --> So that means only the player that has the most enhancements gets to keep the difference and not all of it. In practice we only got about CS 2 at most. Did you guys play it like this and didn't you get +2 at most as well?
P116 1st Age book, Shields: "Shields may only provide a deflection bonus to the combat situation when they are equipped with a Melee Weapon" --> So which Melee weapon did you equip on your models (brings them over 8pts by the way)?
P115 1st Age Book, Armor: "...Barding on Warmounts or Monstrous Beasts" --> Quoted that because you said "(armor throw to remind: "Toughness + armor + W6")", but that armor is for Warmounts so you are not allowed to use it. And even if you were it costs 10pts so it would bring total costs up to 18 per model (not including the Warmount).
So bringing that all together, correct me if I am wrong, but that alters the equations somewhat.
So I've assumed on average you win the combat situation and the result is on average: 2
To hit: Martial 3 + CS 2 + D6
My level 1 Melee oriented class's MTN = 7 --> So you'd hit that on a 2+ (granted still pretty good)
On averages D6's roll 3s, so imagine you rolled a 3. Which makes your CRN (3+2+3) = 8
It's a hit and my model needs to save. Its Toughness is 4. It lost the combat situation, so no CS.
To save: 4 + D6 --> So I'd need 4+ (granted this still doesn't seem to end well)
But as you know we hit simultaneously in Melee Combat. My Martial is 3 and your MTN is 6.
To hit: Martial 3 + D6 --> So I'd hit on a 3+ (not that great but on average it should work)
On averages D6's roll 3s, so imagine I rolled a 3. Which makes my CRN (3+3) = 6
It's a hit and your model needs to save. Your Toughness is 2.
To save: Toughness 2 + CS 2 + D6 --> So on a 2+ you'd save (which is still pretty good but there is at least a chance)
==> Now keep in mind, this was all based on the perfect scenario for the Citizen Militia. They were allowed to use their active deflection. I was assuming average D6 rolls of 3. And so forth. But I hope the above showed that the Melee Combat was not an automatic win. 'Cause my Reptilia level 1 class squads have a few more things not covered in the above example:
Strength 4 from 2 handed Melee weapon (so +1 CS from Strength)
Movement 4 (so +1 CS from Charging)
Final Thoughts:
And then some final thoughts on the matter. More an opinion than something I can back up with numbers. I really think with a game as complex and vast as Genesys that you can't compare single classes of units together. Whole factions need to be compared to each other and balanced out. To give an example: I have dedicated Ranged combat squads that I hope will have taken a model or two from your Citizen Militia before they can reach me. Or my fireball flinging Wizard will hopefully get one. You get the idea. Granted they seem though buggers to take down with Shields. But I'm sure we'll have tricks to deal with them. ;-)