Yes, that seems not intended but legal (obviously, you are not going to put your own objectives the furthest , even more if you are playing a tournament, so you take the official ruling which allows you to do that, sadly), so, there are some situations and things that should be stated, at least in battle mode, to be more ācompetitiveā, the development of the competitive play cannot be left to an agreement between players, and changing again between other playersā¦ I think.
Same happens with the other topic about modding āequipped weaponsā, like Marcus Punch, it seems a bit incoherent from a RPG development/perspective, but the actual ruling allows you to mod that Punch with melee mods, because Marcus has access to them even in Battle mode, and he is equipped with his own āmelee weaponā (yes, unarmed weapon like the videogame, but here is treated as melee weapon, so melee mods inā¦ not the case with Deathclaw crush, it is not a melee weapon, so it does not get mods or even it does not get the black die STR bonus, and maybe it should roll it due the āheavyā hit at meleeā¦).
By the way, after a long time, I think this mode should receive more special or default scenarios, with the needing of using ācomputerā and ālockpickā, but careful with the creature faction players . Actually, the only skill you really need in battle mode is āSearchā.
What do you think about battle mode? Have you found any odd rule or āholeā? Do you think it should be updated with other scenarios or different kinds of objectives? Maybe another way to earn VPās?
Battle Mode has a lot of holes, not just in objectives and vague rules, but in list building. For instance, Hecaton has been playing around with Grenade Launchers that shoot 3-4 times a round. I can do a similar thing in NCR with a Marksman. Does anyone like 5 shots a turn from a Veteran Marksman?
Or things like the Minigun, Flamer, Fat Man, most grenades, most melee weapons (take Machete Gladius or Power Fist for pretty much everything), something like 80% of handguns and rifles, most armor, most armor modsā¦hell, most things in the game are poor competitive choices as well.
I understand the game was designed for a play at home by yourself style of game, but thatās not really a great way to sell it. For most people itās a social hobby, and most of that is going to be competitive, even if itās not a tournament setting. That is the arena that should drive balance changes, rules clarification, etc.
So yes, we need more refined scenarios, more refined points costs, more refined list building, more refined rules in general.
When you are playing at home by yourself you can change anything you like to fit your style.
Yes, I think it needs to improve, it seems a bit abandoned (from some time ago, it just got and updated point list with a different design, before it was more restricted, showing directly wich equipment the models were allowed to buy), if you want to have a game wich you can say it has a Competitive mode, it should be really well refined about ruling and points/items access, and well balanced, regardless of the rest of modes the game has.
I personally think this mode needs a models caps by points (so a Creature faction player could not bring 30 minis in a 500 caps game!), and some item costs (like stun baton unplayable due its cost, or cattle prod, the best option within the cheapest weaponsā¦ who could even think about buying an stun baton at 25, when Cattle Prod is just 3?).
I hope to see a revision on this for the next wave, it really needs that.
I agree completely. There really needs to be a complete overall of the point costs, unit allowances, etc. These days games like WH40k have proven that a gameās long term health is often linked to how well it plays competitively. While there may never be a strong tournament scene for this game, if it does not have a well balanced battle mode it will ultimately suffer.
There are plans afoot, but they are a little ways away.
The core concept for Wasteland Warfare is not a PvP tourney game. Its not what the design intent was and its not the direction the company wants to take it at present.
But as I say, there are things that will fill that void further down the line.
I donāt want to be rude, but if the company did not want that design, why spend the time or effort to release it years ago? Maybe, if the core game is not intended for that, it should have other modes instead of a competitive one (I prefer the narrative one personally), or maybe it could have been released later, with a more refined rules. I am waiting for Homestead, the idea seems pretty good. And Vault tec for a dungeon crawler mode or something like thatā¦
About the rules above, there are still āholesā in the rules wich could affect the game anyway, it does not need to be battle mode (like mixing melee weapons and āunarmedā weapons in the same icon, so the mods apply to them same way, like Marcus punch)
The divergent approach in the early days was due to several different people coming into the company from different backgrounds and a slight wooliness around brief.
As the writer of the original battlemode I am of course biased towards PvP play, but at present its not a higher priority due to other products taking development bandwidth.
Once there is more news we will be sure to post and catch everyone up.
Iām not going to go into details about the whatās and whereās of the game development, but the current focus is on narrative adventuring. This could be solo, this could be co-op, but its not laser focussed on PvP tournament play and the lack of a traditional ānecromundaā style campaign was a deliberate choice.
Wasteland Warfare is almost a giant sandbox, that anyone can reach into and do āsomethingā with. That gives it a huge amount of flexibility and possibility but that does come at the risk of some slightly rough edges and modules/ideas getting left to gather dust for a while.
We are now well into the life cycle of the game and things are pretty bedded in, but that doesnāt mean we are not working on things that PvP and escalation style campaign style modules for the future.
However, if there is one lesson I have been keen for Modiphius to learn is that announcing before we are ready is a terrible idea. So, Iām keeping things close to my chest for now but when the time comes there will be plenty of new things to reveal.
The Battlemode topic continues to be an internal discussion and we are looking at the notes on the second version that was written to work out whatās left to make it fit for consumption.
Hope that helps give some idea of what has gone before, as to the future, weāll be talking more as we are ready.
For the most part itās just applying points costs differently to each mode. A Battlemode price list and limitations on certain things would resolve a lot of things.
Coming from RPGs, you donāt need really need a lot of rules for solo play, you can just make a decision on your own. When you play with other people and want some fairness you need rules.
Well, 2-3 years ago, battle mode had a different system, more restricted from my point of view, the equipment was specifically āselectedā (one by one) for each specific model. Maybe more āclosedā to the huge quantity of cards the game has, but I think it could have more āprecisionā, you donāt really need a huge list to look for equipment. But, for example, chems were too expensive thereā¦
So I get that the rules system is very flexible, and obviously it plugs into your rpg system very well, but for those of us trying to have weekly game nights and build a community weāre kind of adrift. Weāre stuck on battlemode atm, because itās the easiest way to say āletās sit down and play a game.ā I would love some less competitive 2player frameworks for the game; fundamentally I find solo play pointless and co op a bit of a novelty.
All I can say is I know, the dev team know and there will be things in the future.
But I cannot and will not say what or when as I donāt want people to be endlessly asking why something announced isnāt out yet.
Rules dev is a tricky beast at the best of times and when you add in the licensed nature of the product and needing approvals, its better to say little and surprise people than promise the moon and fall short.
I guess we can house rule things in the meantime and provide feedback. Iām just happy to see the dev team active, providing feedback, and taking part in discussion. That means a lot.
we will be having championships in Poland this month, running on home rules (mostly unit limit, equipment ban/limit per team) so will be able to share our expirences how it went right after.
the first of 4 is gonna take place on 21.11.21
, even more if you are playing a tournament, so you take the official ruling which allows you to do that, sadly), so, there are some situations and things that should be stated, at least in battle mode, to be more ācompetitiveā, the development of the competitive play cannot be left to an agreement between players, and changing again between other playersā¦ I think.