Heroscape 2 Prediction Thread

[Blue Trails]

Originally Posted by GaryLASQ

Well, I did say it was crazy, didn't I?

Thinking about it more realistically, a big heavy flying fig like Nilfheim (not to mention this new gargantuan dragon they showed us at GenCon) would keep toppling and fall too easily. It's still pretty cool to think about though.

Even if dragons' weight distributions prevent them from balancing above a traditional base, they're not the only new flying units we've seen. The concept art for the CC Air Captain included some sketches of his craft mounted atop a conspicuously artificial stand, while Drake 3.0 and the IC Wraithriders appear to stably "float above the ground." Therefore, I think we can safely expect flight stands in some capacity.

[Master Roshi]

Originally Posted by Blue Trails

Even if dragons' weight distributions prevent them from balancing above a traditional base, they're not the only new flying units we've seen. The concept art for the CC Air Captain included some sketches of his craft mounted atop a conspicuously artificial stand, while Drake 3.0 and the IC Wraithriders appear to stably "float above the ground." Therefore, I think we can safely expect flight stands in some capacity.

I think adding some new mechanics for flying characters would be fun; make it so that it only affects combat between flying characters so that it doesn't have too large of an impact on the meta. Some form of terrain that impacts fliers would be interesting

[Tornado]

Clouds!

[Blue Trails]

Originally Posted by Master Roshi

I think adding some new mechanics for flying characters would be fun; make it so that it only affects combat between flying characters so that it doesn't have too large of an impact on the meta. Some form of terrain that impacts fliers would be interesting

Now that you mention it, an optional rule that invokes falling damage rules whenever a flying unit hits another hard enough would be fun! Terrain would be cool too; I'm partial to 0-height "downdraft/windstorm" tiles that cost extra movement for flying figures to enter and reduce the Range of normal attacks targeting small/medium figures within them.

Originally Posted by Tornado

Clouds!

Good idea!

--------------------
The Craven Court faction seems very interesting. This seems to be another fresh take on classic Heroscape dynamics; the planetary power struggle between the Ironclad Collective and Clockwork Combine is already reminiscent of that between the Soulborgs and Mariedians, and the presence of a bio-engineered, hive-forming, militaristic monsters with horridly alien appearances on a planet of animal-humanoid hybrids and wild beasts reminds me of the Marros' conflict with the various animal races of Marr.

[GaryLASQ]

Originally Posted by Blue Trails

... Therefore, I think we can safely expect flight stands in some capacity.

Well maybe it wasn't such a crazy idea afterall, simply based on some of the concept art. I guess seeing the drawing of the airship and floating-Drake is what put the idea in my head in the first place.

I've long thought that one of the reasons we don't see a lot of maps with tall castles (certainly not in tournaments) is that when a map starts containing a lot of spaces that are 10, 20, 30 or more levels high, the Flying ability becomes very OP.

I'm kind of surprised we never saw an evolution in the rules that put a vertical limitation on flying. I think castles and tall cliffs would "play better" if say every 10 levels up or down (where getting from one space to the next has more than a 10-level difference) cost one movement point for flyers, for instance. (Maybe with a little more complexity than that, but not too complicated.)

Same thing with range. We all know about its horizontal limit printed on the army card, but what if the vertical limit (up or down) was something like "take the horizontal-limit and multiply by 5 to get its vertical limit."

Then maybe we would start seeing some tournaments that tailored an event or two that were meant for playing armies with lots of flying/ranged figs simply because it used several maps with a lot of extreme high points.

Edit: Maybe this is another one of my predictions. We will see vertical limits added to flying and range in the next rulebook.

Edit edit: I'm fully expecting someone to say "My gaming group already house-rules something like this."

[Blue Trails]

Originally Posted by GaryLASQ

Well maybe it wasn't such a crazy idea afterall, simply based on some of the concept art. I guess seeing the drawing of the airship and floating-Drake is what put the idea in my head in the first place.

I've long thought that one of the reasons we don't see a lot of maps with tall castles (certainly not in tournaments) is that when a map starts containing a lot of spaces that are 10, 20, 30 or more levels high, the Flying ability becomes very OP.

I'm kind of surprised we never saw an evolution in the rules that put a vertical limitation on flying. I think castles and tall cliffs would "play better" if say every 10 levels up or down (where getting from one space to the next has more than a 10-level difference) cost one movement point for flyers, for instance. (Maybe with a little more complexity than that, but not too complicated.)

Same thing with range. We all know about its horizontal limit printed on the army card, but what if the vertical limit (up or down) was something like "take the horizontal-limit and multiply by 5 to get its vertical limit."

Then maybe we would start seeing some tournaments that tailored an event or two that were meant for playing armies with lots of flying/ranged figs simply because it used several maps with a lot of extreme high points.

Edit: Maybe this is another one of my predictions. We will see vertical limits added to flying and range in the next rulebook.

Edit edit: I'm fully expecting someone to say "My gaming group already house-rules something like this."

I'd guess your unconscious mind just happened to notice that art and gave you the idea at an opportune time.

Although Flying certainly exacerbates the issue, I think that Range is the primary limit on the height of a map. There's a significant difference between hiding on an inaccessible perch and attacking from one; contrast a stalemate with a free victory. Moreover, consider how many waves passed before we saw ranged fliers that couldn't be blocked from extreme hills by uneven terrain (e.g. single-hex ones), as well as the short Range of these units. Balancing the ability to actually fight from cliffs seemed to be vital to the original designers.

Meanwhile, extreme height as a replacement for elevation scaling sounds interesting and plausible. At risk of complicating things, maybe the increment for additional movement cost should be equal to the height of the Flying figure.

I'm less convinced on the idea of height-based Range penalties due to personal difficulties in visualizing a projectile's trajectory shortening when said projectile is launched from a greater height. If anything, I'd expect Range to decrease when shooting up but increase when shooting down, which would only compound the advantage offered by extreme height.

I'll be interested in seeing if you're right, though. We're supposed to receive new rules, and something as prolific as elevation seems like a good place to start.

----------------
As a complete non-sequitur, the new Craven Court art shows 21 bugs per Phalanx and 3 bugs per Legionnaire while mentioning a degree of interchangeability between the two. This could hint towards a 7-life Hero that wounds itself to spawn squaddies in equal proportion, with said squaddies able to self-destruct to heal or revive the Hero.

[Agent Minivann]

When aiming up, hit zones are their own kind of vertical range limit. A vertical range limit makes more sense when aiming down extreme height with a battlement that extends the aiming dot.

[Mr Migraine]

I'm predicting a desert/sand/rock terrain announcement tomorrow, potentially with sand-colored water tiles that act as quicksand. This would align with a potential terrain set that WotC mentioned on this site a decade ago. It would also match the Mad Max vibe I'm getting from some of these new factions.

[Tai-Pan]

What if they invented some kind of hex-caps? So you build everything with standard hexes and merely change thin caps on the top hex to change the terrain. Even just the way water, lava, etc. was done would save a lot of plastic and costs

And I REALLY hope mats are a thing. My Lexan maps are great, but usually not big enough for what I really want to do.

[UtahScott]

That's Hyground's hex design, open honeycombs with caps.

[Mr Migraine]

With these new terrain pieces not providing much solid line-of-sight coverage, I'm expecting them to use Ticalla-style defense bonuses, or (I hope) an official partial-cover rule.

[IAmBatman]

Originally Posted by Mr Migraine

With these new terrain pieces not providing much solid line-of-sight coverage, I'm expecting them to use Ticalla-style defense bonuses, or (I hope) an official partial-cover rule.

Hard to tell when we're just seeing concept art and not the actual minis yet.