Radical YCE: melee

JawRippa

Gang Hero
Mar 31, 2017
1,479
2,108
138
Saint-Petersburg, Russia
No Pushover
When a fighter rolls to hit against an enemy with a WS equal to or greater than their own, they subtract one from their results.
As appealing as it sounds, it does not solve main problems:
  • Fighter's Attack stat still does not matter
  • WS2+ still probably murders another WS2+ on the charge, and a flat -1 to hit punishes WS4+ fighters a lot more than WS2+/WS3+
When I look at the sum total of the YCE offering I come away with the feeling, "well, might as well just make a shooting gang," though.
From my experience (with houserules), people have to mix shooting and melee, simply because shooting is always good, but melee is inevitable. With GW rules, you want to slap as many guns as you can, because even if you become tied up in melee, your friends can just blast off whoever is engaging you.
  • Getting into melee is a lot easier, and you are a threat even if you are pinned within M". You do not need to rely on overseer and other junk, since everyone's threat range is decent.
  • Even moderate terrain gives enough cover for melee fighters because of 'hard target', as long as you don't put tall ruins into deployment zones and turn middle of the table into a killing field.
  • BS2+ is not as crazy because in reality hard cover makes that into BS3+.
  • Shooting at a friend now has a 50% chance to friendly fire even if you hit and you can't template snipe egnaged enemies anymore.
  • Blasts no longer ignore 95% of rules.
  • I've redesigned a rotation of 6 basic scenarios to promote fighters doing objectives and opening loot cascets. Opening cascets is going to be noticeably safer and give tactic cards.
  • Guns are much more expensive. We are talking 25cr. lasguns from old necromunda expensive.
There used to be another way to tone down shooting; my ruleset used to force an ammo check when a six was rolled on to-hit, which essentially doubled the chance for an ammo check. However, I had to remove it, since players found it counter-intuitive for bad things to happen on natural six. I'm still trying to figure out a way to trigger more ammo checks per fight, but I can't think of anything elegant and easy to remember. Currently weapons last too long without going out of ammo, but it seems that this one can't be solved.

Overall, I don't see the reason to continue arguing about melee. I've been playtesting my own ruleset for more than 2 years as each campaign gradually introduced more and more changes into the game based on feedback and overall player's experience, so I'm adamant on every change, especially after I had to cut so much for YCE to be more accessible. If you do not find these changes good for the game, that is fine. You could always cherry pick things that you like from the ruleset, such as clarified movement rules or reworked bottle checks and continue playing with GW ruleset.
 
Last edited:

KA7777

Gang Champion
Jan 19, 2018
356
451
68
Canada
Overall, I don't see the reason to continue arguing about melee. I've been playtesting my own ruleset for more than 2 years as each campaign gradually introduced more and more changes into the game based on feedback and overall player's experience, so I'm adamant on every change, especially after I had to cut so much for YCE to be more accessible. If you do not find these changes good for the game, that is fine. You could always cherry pick things that you like from the ruleset, such as clarified movement rules or reworked bottle checks and continue playing with GW ruleset.
I guess it's my unease at you co-opting the YCE moniker that keeps me returning to the threads.

I reviewed some of the 2020 player polling from this forum. Something like ~15% of players desired serious changes to melee, WS impact, etc. Your rules do not reflect the desires of polled participants -- as you say, these are a thinned down version of your own extensive house rules. Why are you calling them YCE instead of JRE? It's bold, and it's misleading.
 

JawRippa

Gang Hero
Mar 31, 2017
1,479
2,108
138
Saint-Petersburg, Russia
I reviewed some of the 2020 player polling from this forum. Something like ~15% of players desired serious changes to melee, WS impact, etc. Your rules do not reflect the desires of polled participants -- as you say, these are a thinned down version of your own extensive house rules. Why are you calling them YCE instead of JRE? It's bold, and it's misleading.
Because these rules incorporate more than 80 pages of discussion in private conversation between members of YCE committee, some of which wanted to see changes to melee. The poll happened a really long time ago, and after a while we've decided that it should be used as a general guideline, not something that you slavishly follow. After all, why would you want to ask making melee less deadly when it is next to impossible to get there in the first place?

Edit: In all fairness, I should probably include in the author's notes that the rules were changed, so readers know what they are dealing with right away. Clarifying stuff alone would not suffice.
 
Last edited:

Petitioner's City

Gang Hero
Nov 15, 2017
1,338
2,277
153
Edinburgh, UK
Another point is that the poll also was tiny and in no way really a "community"; thousands or, more likely, tens of thousands of people collect and play this game. There is no real value in the poll, given it wasn't conducted in a ethical or tested manner. But that isn't a bad thing, as polls themselves aren't necessarily better than any other form of decision making and leadership :)
 

KA7777

Gang Champion
Jan 19, 2018
356
451
68
Canada
Another point is that the poll also was tiny and in no way really a "community"; thousands or, more likely, tens of thousands of people collect and play this game. There is no real value in the poll, given it wasn't conducted in a ethical or tested manner. But that isn't a bad thing, as polls themselves aren't necessarily better than any other form of decision making and leadership :)
Ok... but doesn't that make the sequence of events,

1. Decide to make a community edition
2. Decide to call it YCE
3. Decide to base the final decisions on collaboration
4. Decide to poll players to determine the extent of changes
5. Decide to cancel 3.
6. Decide to cancel 4.
7. Call it YCE anyways

I'm turned off by the sense that a set of very particularly individually-suited house rules are being camouflauged as the consensus result of community discussion/effort, without any indicators that that's what happened. I guarantee you I wouldn't be posting about this if the document didn't use the YCE name.

It's all well and good to mention "80 pages of committee discussion" but that's still not transparent. How many people were on the committee? Did the conversation end with a committee vote in favour of a contested melee system with defense rolls?

I see like 2-3 people consistently engaged in the defense of the final version of the melee rules, and many of the Yaktribe members whose opinions I value most highly haven't really said anything more substantial than "Congrats for tackling the project!" or "I might use some parts of this."