|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
In another thread, I suggested this ability as an alternative for activation control:
Patience: If a character without Patience is unactivated, then you may choose to not activate this character this phase, even if that means activating 0 characters.
Someone responded, but to avoid threadjacking, let's transfer that discussion here. (Other ideas also welcome.)
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
EmporerDragon wrote:For wording, how about:
Patience: After activating, if this character takes no action (moving, making a save, or using a special ability, force power, or commander effect), they are considered unactivated at the end of the phase if an ally without patience is unactivated. There are problems with that wording, but it's irrelevant. If the designers adopt this idea or something similar, they would iron out any wording issues. Quote:I'd probably add a once per round restriction on that to keep people from really stalling, as imagine how slow someone would be if they had a squad with high activations, tempo control, and patient characters. If you already out-activate the opponent, Patience doesn't come into play. It only comes into play when you want to save someone for last but the opponent out-activates you.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator, Rules Guy
Joined: 8/24/2008
Posts: 5,201
|
There are some guidelines that I think should never be broken. Having the option to activate 0 characters is one of them.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
 Patience If all allies without Patience are activated at the beginning of an opponent's phase, the opponent activates all unactivated characters without Patience this phase.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 12/26/2008
Posts: 2,115
Location: Watertown, SD
|
Another random thought - A commander effect along the lines of:
Once per round, at the end of your phase, if you have 0 characters considered unactivated and your opponent has more than 2, select one follower. They are considered unactivated.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 9/30/2008
Posts: 1,288
|
Patience is an idea that has been kicked around for a long, long time now, but just hasn't made it into any sets. I do like it, and it works well with another ability suggested long ago that I would like to implement.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 5/14/2008
Posts: 2,063
|
Personally, I rather see an activation cap enforced. It used to be 12-13 was the highest then, with cheap mooks, rapport for cheaper mooks, and more reserves/reinforcement/bribery, we know have squads that rival Warhammer with 20+ pieces. I haven't played in awhile, but if I was just getting into the game now, seeing how much you need to be viable might be a bit daunting.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/9/2008
Posts: 4,729
Location: Chicago
|
Lying in Wait - this character may replace turn to activate again this round after all enemy characters have activated.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
Sithborg, is there a rules issue with a 0-activation phase? If it's just a rules issue for empty phases, Lying in Wait might work better. TimmerB123 wrote:Lying in Wait - this character may replace turn to activate again this round after all enemy characters have activated. Did you intend multiple activations for multiple Force Renewals? Also, how would two Lying in Wait characters interact? Example: Character A uses Lying in Wait. As the first activation of a phase, Enemy B uses Lying in Wait as that player's last activation. Does Player B's phase now end, or does the player have to activate Enemy B again as the second activation in the phase? If he has to activate again, can he use Lying in Wait again? I think the version below addresses those issues. It keeps it at one activation per character per round by splitting the activation from the turn. It makes it so a player can only benefit from Lying in Wait if the opponent still has a phase remaining. Other than that, it's pretty much the same thing: Lying in Wait Replaces turn; once this round this character may take an immediate turn at the end of an opponent's phase if all enemies are activated.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 12/26/2008
Posts: 1,233
|
I can see the opposite effect also.
Aggressive Tactics: your opponent must activate an additional Piece Every Round
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/30/2008
Posts: 2,093
|
I like these ideas, but it is very difficult to keep them out of squads that can also get activation control so then act control would be even better since for instance I would act 1 and you would act 3. I outactivate you much faster and need fewer acts to achieve my goal.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/26/2010
Posts: 530
|
Alternate would mean not a cheap Fringe character with Black Ops?
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
urbanjedi wrote:I like these ideas, but it is very difficult to keep them out of squads that can also get activation control so then act control would be even better since for instance I would act 1 and you would act 3. I outactivate you much faster and need fewer acts to achieve my goal. I assume you're talking about Aggressive Tactics there. You could keep it out of factions with activation control. So no Rebel/NR/Imperial/Separatist. Just Republic, Old Republic, Mandalorian. Also Sith since their 'activation control' requires a 114-pt piece. Possibly Fringe if it has a Fringe-only requirement. Did Vong ever get activation control besides the Yammosk? I don't really pay attention to them. Kamikaze13 wrote:Alternate would mean not a cheap Fringe character with Black Ops? For the sake of discussion I'm happy to hear any ideas. For Fringe Black Ops, I think a 20-pt character would make more sense. If it's a Lobot choice, you shouldn't get anything else with it. And it should cost more than Dodonna/Ozzel/San Hill. If it's a blunt, hard counter like that and it's available in reinforcements, it shouldn't cost less than the thing it's countering.
|
|
Rank: Hailfire Droid
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/18/2010
Posts: 36
|
Quote: Did Vong ever get activation control besides the Yammosk? Supreme Overlord Quorreal.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/9/2008
Posts: 4,729
Location: Chicago
|
FlyingArrow wrote:Sithborg, is there a rules issue with a 0-activation phase? If it's just a rules issue for empty phases, Lying in Wait might work better. TimmerB123 wrote:Lying in Wait - this character may replace turn to activate again this round after all enemy characters have activated. Did you intend multiple activations for multiple Force Renewals? Also, how would two Lying in Wait characters interact? Example: Character A uses Lying in Wait. As the first activation of a phase, Enemy B uses Lying in Wait as that player's last activation. Does Player B's phase now end, or does the player have to activate Enemy B again as the second activation in the phase? If he has to activate again, can he use Lying in Wait again? I think the version below addresses those issues. It keeps it at one activation per character per round by splitting the activation from the turn. It makes it so a player can only benefit from Lying in Wait if the opponent still has a phase remaining. Other than that, it's pretty much the same thing: Lying in Wait Replaces turn; once this round this character may take an immediate turn at the end of an opponent's phase if all enemies are activated. Didn't think of that, honestly. It was just off the cuff.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/9/2008
Posts: 4,729
Location: Chicago
|
urbanjedi wrote:I like these ideas, but it is very difficult to keep them out of squads that can also get activation control so then act control would be even better since for instance I would act 1 and you would act 3. I outactivate you much faster and need fewer acts to achieve my goal. ??? Not difficult AT ALL. Make the abilities very scarce, and only for factions without activation control. I thought that went without saying.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 12/26/2008
Posts: 1,233
|
If they are given to a faction with Control, Like Separatists for example, Give it Rival for San Hill. Not realy that bad of a solution, and it kills 2 birds with 1 stone realy.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 12/26/2008
Posts: 1,233
|
i just cannot see it being good to give access to Imperials for a piece like this. Honestly In SIth IT wouldnt realy be a big issue, because if you cost the piece around 15-20 it wouldnt see play in sith, even if it were fringe.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 5/26/2009
Posts: 8,428
|
countrydude82487 wrote:i just cannot see it being good to give access to Imperials for a piece like this. Which piece are you referring to?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/17/2010
Posts: 3,682
Location: Beggers Canyon Tatooine
|
the activation control we have is bad enough!.........please God! NO MORE!
|
|
|
Guest |