Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread
 

What about giving them a class which would also be a quick reference to occupancy? i.e. Compact - 2 people; Sedan - 4 people; SUV - 6 people; Truck - 2 people plus item or items; Public - up to 20 people (thinking bus or train here, possibly passenger jet, if ever needed.) These are just my initial thoughts.

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread
 

I would rather not have the class written on the card and just keep Occupancy there.

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread
 

Yeah, keep these as DOs, just ones you can start with.


Honestly, I'm wondering if we should make draftable DOs their own category/rule, one that includes both regular and VDOs... but not all of them. I can theoretically see the point in a draftable static DO (shield generator to start with - not necessarily that, but there are possibilities), and that way we could do those as well if we wanted to but have no actual requirement to make any given DO or VDO draftable... so, if we wanted to make a non-draftable VDO, we could, or a draftable DO, we could. Just a more flexible, useful system.

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread
 

I'm with you, L_O, but that's a big project. Let's start with VDOs and see where it leads.

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread
 

Yeah, I'd like to end up there eventually. Starting with Vehicles as a test case, though!

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread
 

It's not, actually. I'm just talking about putting the rule in place, not making any present DOs draftable (in fact there aren't any static ones right now I'd want to be draftable). It's just the introduction of a set of 'drafting DO rules' that mean that any DO with a points cost, Vehicle or otherwise, can be drafted and placed in your start-zone, and if it doesn't, it can't (even if it's a VDO, so it gives us room for non-draftable VDOs if we wanted to make any). We'd only have to start with the two existing VDOs since they're the only existing DOs we'd want draftable, and it would mean that any future DOs we make, vehicle or not, could be made draftable or not as we see fit. It's literally no more work initially, it just gives us more room to manoeuver, on both sides.

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread
 

Vehicles come with some additional challenges, so I'd like to make sure we work those out. Once we have the mechanics for Vehicles finalized, though, we could definitely write it up in the rules as a general draftable DOs rule and then have the Vehicle Rules just clarify the extra stuff relevant to Vehicles.

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread
 

That's basically what I was suggesting. :)

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread
 

:up:

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread
 

Sorry I'm late replying here.

Anyway, I only barely understand the VDO rules (never looked at them before now, I couldn't be less interested in the whole thing personally), but I think the core rules here are sound. My issue is really more with how all the vehicles are going to have a variation of Carry and an auto-wound power, as those are two of the very best things a card can have. I don't think the Mole Machine is going to come in at 200 for example, it is more useful than that.

Personally, I'd shoot for these being... not overcosted but like on the high side of what feels right... anyway. Like they should be available to those that want to use them, but they shouldn't be so good that they're something people feel obligated to draft to get the best army they can. C3G already does a lot of complicated stuff just within the basic game, requiring people to learn VDO rules or spell rules or whatever just to be able to run a half decent army is something I'm very wary of as it feels like a great way to kill off any newcomers' interest in the game. Not saying we're at that point now, just that it is something to be mindful of.

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread
 

They are considered optional, like Knockback, so any tournament could just say they're not allowed.

Re: Draftable Vehicles Discussion Thread
 

Yeah, definitely agree with that philosophy. A generic Sports Car or whatever especially doesn't need to be some kind of juiced competitive beast.