Just a comment on V3 and Bo’s position that assault is nerfed. Most videos are comparing how V3 compares to V2. My suggestion is treat V3 as a new game and change the paradigm. This way assault and the various other aspects form part of a new approach. Bo also mentions the incentive is to stand back and shoot. To my point above, there is very little incentive to stand back and shoot given the mission restructure. You need to get up close and personal if you want to win in most missions. My emerging thoughts are armoured transports armed with teams of vets and assault weapons, supported by heavy firepower. We will see. Thanks for the great discussion
Tio's could always make a rule about smoke. Perhaps a deviation d6, 2d6, ect. The smoke attack you described would really be cinematic and a joy to play
Agreed. Easy fix is to make it an auto spawn on the first attempt, but with 2D6 (opponent directed) scatter unless at least one of those die is a 6. OR, if you want honing, let the player opt to roll 2D6 to hone, and pick the highest die to determine if it hits. If it does hit, the opponent gets to scatter x inches equal to the other die. I could come up with like 5 more variations of this, but I'll stop with these. If smoke spam is a concern, just set a limit, like you may fire1 successful smoke shell per mortar/artillery you field (or just straight up a 2-3 shell limit per heavy/artillery platoon taken). For a mechanic that was already so underutilized, and a BA edition so dependent on cover, I am surprised smoke mechanics were as neglected as they were.
18:25 yes this is true, but also just read the next paragraph about measuring distance. You always measure to/from the gun breech and ignore the barrel and the crew. This is very clear if I am shooting at an artillery unit I shoot at the breech of the gun model, so I don't care if someone tries to hide all their models behind a building anyways, I dont measure or aim at the crew models.
As someone who has listened to all your podcasts I have to say I had no clue what that title of the vid meant. If you wanna catch new watchers on youtube you gotta up that title and frankly that thumbnail game as well. I want you guys to get the viewership you deserve so keep at it. The typical way to write an engaging title is to ask an open question with a bit of mystery
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
They should make competitive Reading comprehension competitions then some some of the tournament players might read the rulebook properly.
Rofl
😂
Just a comment on V3 and Bo’s position that assault is nerfed. Most videos are comparing how V3 compares to V2. My suggestion is treat V3 as a new game and change the paradigm. This way assault and the various other aspects form part of a new approach. Bo also mentions the incentive is to stand back and shoot. To my point above, there is very little incentive to stand back and shoot given the mission restructure. You need to get up close and personal if you want to win in most missions. My emerging thoughts are armoured transports armed with teams of vets and assault weapons, supported by heavy firepower. We will see.
Thanks for the great discussion
Tio's could always make a rule about smoke. Perhaps a deviation d6, 2d6, ect. The smoke attack you described would really be cinematic and a joy to play
Agreed.
Easy fix is to make it an auto spawn on the first attempt, but with 2D6 (opponent directed) scatter unless at least one of those die is a 6.
OR, if you want honing, let the player opt to roll 2D6 to hone, and pick the highest die to determine if it hits. If it does hit, the opponent gets to scatter x inches equal to the other die. I could come up with like 5 more variations of this, but I'll stop with these.
If smoke spam is a concern, just set a limit, like you may fire1 successful smoke shell per mortar/artillery you field (or just straight up a 2-3 shell limit per heavy/artillery platoon taken). For a mechanic that was already so underutilized, and a BA edition so dependent on cover, I am surprised smoke mechanics were as neglected as they were.
18:25 yes this is true, but also just read the next paragraph about measuring distance. You always measure to/from the gun breech and ignore the barrel and the crew. This is very clear if I am shooting at an artillery unit I shoot at the breech of the gun model, so I don't care if someone tries to hide all their models behind a building anyways, I dont measure or aim at the crew models.
As someone who has listened to all your podcasts I have to say I had no clue what that title of the vid meant. If you wanna catch new watchers on youtube you gotta up that title and frankly that thumbnail game as well. I want you guys to get the viewership you deserve so keep at it. The typical way to write an engaging title is to ask an open question with a bit of mystery