Pre-Measure

[TreeNinja]

That is not true at all. The only time you eyeball it in combat is when you have no other choice. Rangefinding devices and techniques are always used when available and not using them could cost you your life. Also, rangefinders have been around since

the 1700's so it would fit the fluff, too.

Maybe have it where you can hire a 1 SS merc (so all factions can take him or her) who is a mathematician that allows you to pre-measure that way those who do not pre-measure get a SS advantage out of it.

Also, it would be cool to have a mathematician as a minion.

I should clerify when I was talking about combat. I was talking about the aspects of directly in a firefight. I agree certain types of modern military units have rangefinder equipment. it does exist. and pre-firefight could be used. but not once while I was active duty did I ever see a rangefinder that you could use during a firefight that would get you killed. those where for when you had the element of surpise. which is why I could see allowing people to measure the board after the board is setup but before the game startes. I was taught techniques that at the end of the day are just eyeballing it. I was just a basic riflemen so of course they were not going to waste money on me getting anything like that to use directly. so my view of combat is scewed from my training (the other factor is I got out back in 98 so technoligy has advanced since then so I would be surprised on what's available now)

I think the idea of a model having a rangefinder ability like lets say Hans, with his goggles, would fit his fluff rather nicely and I think make him more desirable then he is at the moment. I could see giving maybe some of theose sniper like models the ability to check there range before taking a shot or maybe giving them a 0 ability to do so would make a nice twist. I just really don't think it should be a main stream rule is all.

---------- Post added at 02:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:24 PM ----------

I figured, just like I figure people who say "I like guessing range" actually mean "I enjoy the tactical advantage over my opponents when they can't pre-measure".

Actually I suck at it I'm constantly losing actions because of it, or wasting it to move closer cause I mis-judged my range. I just don't feel it will make the game faster by allowing anyon to pre-measure and in fact I know a player or two who will hyper-analyze everything if they are allowed to.

Edited July 23, 2012 by JoeS

[rancor709]

Whats the harm? Id rather just have premeasuring be allowed and i say thatt because im good at judging distances if my opponent isnt id rather they have access to the same data I do. A majority of. Modern wargames have premeasuring in them. Even warmachine offers a degree of its u may always check your casters control.

[Jonas Albrecht]

in fact I know a player or two who will hyper-analyze everything if they are allowed to.

Then clearly they already hyper-analyze everything they're allowed. The trick to dealing with problematic players isn't adjusting the rules.

[TreeNinja]

Then clearly they already hyper-analyze everything they're allowed. The trick to dealing with problematic players isn't adjusting the rules.

You are correct they do already hyper-analyze the rules but because they are forced to guess they stick to there best guess and run with it. If we said you can pre-meausre they would literally measure every aspect while hyper-anaylizing before each move. so what takes along time for them will take forever. I just don't see how this will speed things along, even with someone who doesn't hyper-analyze it.

[Twisted Metal]

Im really on the fence about premeasuring. On one hand I dont want my opponent to know for certain if they will be able to launch an attack from half way across the board and make contact with my models. On the other hand I absolutely hate it both for myself and my opponent when something ends up being 1/4 or 1/8 inch shy just because they stopped short. I have recently kind of adopted a policy that if my opponent charges me with a model and they end up being 1/8 inch shy ill just give them attack. Im not going to sit there and derail their entire strategy over an 1/8 of an inch. I hope later on in the game they extend the same courtesy back.

[Jonas Albrecht]

You are correct they do already hyper-analyze the rules but because they are forced to guess they stick to there best guess and run with it. If we said you can pre-meausre they would literally measure every aspect while hyper-anaylizing before each move. so what takes along time for them will take forever. I just don't see how this will speed things along, even with someone who doesn't hyper-analyze it.

Right, but the point is that your problematic friends are not a good reason to keep pre-measuring from people who wont abuse it.

[Boscotopia]

I should clerify when I was talking about combat. I was talking about the aspects of directly in a firefight. I agree certain types of modern military units have rangefinder equipment. it does exist. and pre-firefight could be used. but not once while I was active duty did I ever see a rangefinder that you could use during a firefight that would get you killed. those where for when you had the element of surpise. which is why I could see allowing people to measure the board after the board is setup but before the game startes. I was taught techniques that at the end of the day are just eyeballing it. I was just a basic riflemen so of course they were not going to waste money on me getting anything like that to use directly. so my view of combat is scewed from my training (the other factor is I got out back in 98 so technoligy has advanced since then so I would be surprised on what's available now)

So, the military training you received taught you to use your eyes as a rudimentary rangefinder. It is not as accurate as trig nor tech, but it is still leaps and bounds beyond civilian skill. That is the point. These minions and Masters are skilled fighters for the most part and handicapping them with the spatial skills of their armchair general diminishes the believability of the game. I find it silly that a Death Marshal would not know nor could properly gauge the distance of his shots: he would and would fire or maneuver accordingly. Let Malifaux be a game where tatics and card flips determine victory, not measurement and power-gaming.

[Q'iq'el]

The questionable "measurements" where someone might have a shooting range of 16, and need to extend the ruler to 16 inches to "check on the model that is clearly about 8 inches away and has the ruler extend well beyond to see where other models are. They can get called out on it, but they cannot "unlearn" what they just saw, etc...

This only goes to show how subjective these perceptions are. The above not only isn't questionable, but I believe we had an official clarification this is how it *should* be done.

If you have an X" range weapon and you shoot it at a model Y, you are allowed to extend your tape for X" and see how far you can shoot and if the model Y is within that range.

What would be questionable is to choose a model which is clearly 30" away, measure your distance to it and then say: "uh, it's out of range". You pay AP for that, but you get to know exact range to the model you shouldn't be able to measure yet.

That's why the former method is recommended and by the rules, while the later is frowned upon. At least where I play it is so.

[DarcXON]

There are far better advantages to pre-measuring than there are disadvantages. For one it closes that area to cheating as now everyone is allowed. The speed of the game will also get better, and people would be able to plan ahead accordingly.

This would only help people that do not have the ability to gauge ranges so well. Im pretty sure Nix would get a bigger boost at not having to spend 5 minutes trying to estimate the risk of taking an action

In short if we think about it the only people that will "feel" the sting on this coming to pass is the people that count on others being bad at gauging ranges.

[Morgan Vening]

So, the military training you received taught you to use your eyes as a rudimentary rangefinder. It is not as accurate as trig nor tech, but it is still leaps and bounds beyond civilian skill. That is the point. These minions and Masters are skilled fighters for the most part and handicapping them with the spatial skills of their armchair general diminishes the believability of the game. I find it silly that a Death Marshal would not know nor could properly gauge the distance of his shots: he would and would fire or maneuver accordingly. Let Malifaux be a game where tatics and card flips determine victory, not measurement and power-gaming.

The other thing not covered so far in this thread, is that ranges in reality are often fairly fluid, but in wargames, tend not to be.

As an example, a trained marksman can hit with reliability out to a certain range, with some accuracy out a bit further, and then with rarity out further. And none of these even come close to the maximum range of the weapon. Whereas in wargaming, most have a certain distance at which bullets just drop out of the air.

But there's no specific range at which the odds shift dramatically depending on an extra foot or two. And I'm not advocating that ranges should be extended, just that a Death Marshall, as you accurately point out, should know if he's got at least a reasonable chance (ie, actually gets to flip) or not (doesn't get a flip).

As to the general concept of the thread, we allow pre-measuring, but only typically use it in a confirmatory basis. As in, we don't measure each and every thing, then make a decision. But if Marcus, for example, wants to Alpha, checks and finds out he's 8.5" away from the enemy, he can make another decision.

Morgan Vening

[dsmiles]

If you have an X" range weapon and you shoot it at a model Y' date=' you are allowed to extend your tape for X" and see how far you can shoot and if the model Y is within that range.[/quote']I always measure the full range of the weapon, it saves time, later, when I make a second shot against a different target that's in range.

[TreeNinja]

Right, but the point is that your problematic friends are not a good reason to keep pre-measuring from people who wont abuse it.

Actually that isn't the extent of what I meant by that. What I'm trying to say is that I don't see the game tetting faster. I see the game slowing down. the reason I see this is players that already over analyze will get worse but by allowing pre-measuring you permote players to over-analyze, and I belive more players will take longer then normal. I'm not saying that everyone will do this, not what I'm doing I'm saying that those players who don't really won't be saving anymore time then they would have spent if not allowed.

Out side of that it was not my only point to not going the pre-measure route. I feel there are other aspects we lose. and the benefits to me at least the ones that have been brought up, either to my mind are not really there or not enough to alter the rules. I think that if we want to implament a pre-measure allow something where players are allowed to pre-measure before the game. maybe create models that have some ability weither it be full on anytime they want or like an extra 0 action that allows them to pre-measure.

I feel pre-measuring has a place honestlly. to act as a handicap if we can come up with a way to rank player skills or for people that are actually working with a physical limitation. I think those are valid reasons to use pre-action pre-measuring. outside of that I don't think there is enough benefit to change the rules to make it auto-include. I know that if it becomes a mainstream rule, that I'm not good enough to eyeball models to not use it if my opponent is, at least not use it and expect to win. which means that I'm either forced to use the rule if my opponent does'nt want to loose a tactical advantage, or lose more games, because I'm trying to prove a point.

I agree there are a few people out there who are just natrually good with spacial recignition. but I think we are looking at a number similar to the people who are good at card counting. and in my mind that is not enough to change the rules.

[Gruesome]

Actually that isn't the extent of what I meant by that. What I'm trying to say is that I don't see the game tetting faster. I see the game slowing down.

Its interesting to me that you seem to feel that the game will get slower.

I do not know as I have not tried it with this game.

But others apparently HAVE and said the exact opposite and I know that in other games I play that pre-measuring has sped them up, NOT slowed them down.

So, for me, this pretty much seems like a "that sounds nice in theory, but in practice, its wrong".

I can already envision MANY times I have played this game where I was sitting there on my opponents turn really wishing I knew if something was in range to make certain choices much easier. I can GUARANTEE that I would play faster with pre-measure.

[Cadilon]

I can already envision MANY times I have played this game where I was sitting there on my opponents turn really wishing I knew if something was in range to make certain choices much easier. I can GUARANTEE that I would play faster with pre-measure.

This describes me as well. I feel I am a pretty fast decision maker when it comes to strategy. But I spend most of my turn trying to decide if I am in range or not.

As an aside, I find this discussion very interesting. This thread, at least in the beginning, seems very pro pre-measuring. I put this question to my local meta on our Facebook page and they were decidedly anti pre-measuring. I find the two viewpoints very interesting.

[Dustcrusher]

Thought I'd add this, because it's a gratuitous chance to mention Alkemy, my current favorite "simple" miniatures game:

Alkemy ranged attacks have an interesting additional rule for measuring ranged attacks. You declare an estimate of the range to the target, then you measure the actual range. If the estimate is accurate you get an extra attack die. If the estimate is inaccurate, you can still shoot- you just don't get a bonus.

Not saying Malifaux should have anything like this. I just think it's an interesting mechanic and worth a footnote.

[Genetic]

i cant stand pre measuring.. it slows down the action from my experience.. and takes the risk out of the game. Anyone that say they want pre measuring.......JUST GOT DECAPITATED BY A STEAMBORG.

[Pierowmaniac]

Er OK.....did somebody forget to lock all the asylum doors?

*ducks the steamborg*

I guess it would be fairly intersting to see how people actual experience of changing the measuring rules in a game actually breaks down.

Me for example I'd say premeasuring would speed up a game and my experience (fairly limited):

WHFB 4th,5ht,6h,7th to 8th ed.

Malifaux playing with and without terraclips terrain (not actually technically a rule change, but the effect of a terraclips board is identical).

Also what games/houserules have actualy changed from premeasuring to no premeasuring?

Edited July 25, 2012 by Pierowmaniac
additional question added

[Morgan Vening]

Also what games/houserules have actualy changed from premeasuring to no premeasuring?

The problem with retrograding from premeasuring to no premeasuring as a house rule, actually kind of showcases the reason for premeasuring, IMO. Because there is a significant game difference depending on the level of people's spatial awareness, it's unlikely that a player with low levels of spatial awareness will put forth the recommendation (self-inflicting a penalty), and people with high levels will either feel uncomfortable doing so, or be seen as trying to gain an external advantage.

I don't know of a game that officially changed from pre-measure to no-pre-measure, unless Battletech or Heavy Gear did when it went from hexmaps to tabletop (I don't play the latter versions, cause I love the simplicity and ease of hex based terrain).

Morgan Vening

[ravenborne]

In some games I could see pre-measuring taking out tactics, but that's not what Malifaux is about. Its full of tactics and complexity well beyond your ability to judge inches.

[TreeNinja]

I have stated how I feel about pre-measuring, but that doesn't mean I don't think it doesn't have a place. so far I threw out the give a chance for players to pre-measure before the game starts so when your going through the game you can kind eyeball a bit easier and what not. I agree maybe creating some models with the ability to rangefind a valid alternative.The other thing I would throw out there is to create a new (0 or 1) action ability, called for the sake of puting something out there Calculated Shoot, that can be used by most if not all models that allows them to pre-measure for range or distance they declair (or something to that effect, I think you can see what I'm suggesting). I think this would give the option out there but represents the time it takes to work the actual distance in your head.

For me I think instead of allowing universal pre-measuring I think some of these alternates would fit better with the game and allow those that want that type of foreknowledge available to them to obtain it [at the same time they have to sacrifice (sometimes) the ability to do something else] while at the same time you don't remove the aspect of the unknown element from the game (entirely) as you may not be able to always use that ability so that you can use something else.

Edited July 28, 2012 by JoeS

[Gruesome]

For people opposed to pre-measuring, what are your thoughts on people that are physically impaired in some way so as to be at a large disadvantage with eyeballing distance?

[Silas Cordell]

For people opposed to pre-measuring, what are your thoughts on people that are physically impaired in some way so as to be at a large disadvantage with eyeballing distance?

Honestly, my first response is to wonder what drew them to a game system where they'd have such a handicap. There are many quality games out there that don't require the ability to estimate distances.

I'd say that allowances should be made for disabilities on an individual basis, but the same goes for, say, young players. I don't think it's a reason to change how the game is played.

[DarcXON]

but malifaux has so much more than just measuring distances...

Why are we still stuck on the "skill level drop" aspect of premeasuring. There are more things fixed by premeasuring than there are by keeping the rule as is.

[Gruesome]

Honestly, my first response is to wonder what drew them to a game system where they'd have such a handicap.

Perhaps fluff? Card mechanic? Artwork/sculpts? Friends?

There are many quality games out there that don't require the ability to estimate distances.

I'd say that allowances should be made for disabilities on an individual basis, but the same goes for, say, young players. I don't think it's a reason to change how the game is played.

No one is talking about age. (My son knew the rules and competed at Adepticon at the age of 10)

"Making allowances" simply sounds like the opportunity for people to game the system, but I dunno... maybe something like that could work.

Have you ever played on terra-clips?

What are your thoughts on that?

[Silas Cordell]

but malifaux has so much more than just measuring distances...

Why are we still stuck on the "skill level drop" aspect of premeasuring. There are more things fixed by premeasuring than there are by keeping the rule as is.

Because I'm crotchety, and I had to learn how to estimate distances. In my opinion, it is part of the game, it is a skill as much as any other part of the game, and I would prefer that premeasuring not be allowed.

I can't count cards, but I don't want to change to dice to "level" the playing field, and I usually fail an action every game or two due to misjudging a distance, but I consider it part of the game.

I freely admit that this is only my opinion, and I have already said that allowing premeasuring won't make me quit playing or anything.

Have you ever played on terra-clips?

What are your thoughts on that?

Only once, and I didn't have a problem. I don't recall using the squares to measure, but it was over a year ago at this point, so I might have.

Edited July 29, 2012 by Silas Cordell