Avatar of the Tank
Newtoncain
Commander
2985 Posts
    
Land of 10,000 taxes
 | | 07/22/2005 4:20 PM |
| | recovered topic 6266 | |
They just don't know what's good in life...Conan, tell them what is good in life.
To rip the boosters. To count the minis spilled out before you, and to hear the indifference of the women... | |
|
Avatar of the Tank
Newtoncain
Commander
2985 Posts
Land of 10,000 taxes
| | 07/22/2005 4:20 PM |
| | Sweet | |
They just don't know what's good in life...Conan, tell them what is good in life.
To rip the boosters. To count the minis spilled out before you, and to hear the indifference of the women... | |
|
striderlotr
Commander
3370 Posts
| | 07/22/2005 11:22 PM |
| | So we now have a way for the troops to keep pace with the tanks... This could be a great way to keep infantry in the game, especially withthe high gear feature letting it get the extra movement. | |
Sean Banks
Champion of Elementals
Official Organizer
Gen Con 05 maxminis Event | Winterfantasy 06 maxminis Event | Gen Con 06 maxminis Event | Winterfantasy 07 Community Event | |
|
XAos
Underboss
2413 Posts
London
| | 07/25/2005 8:21 AM |
| I don't think "Fighting platform" is a generally beneficial ability.
In most tactical positions the infantry are going to be safer if they unload in the movement phase. Or it will be better using a tank instead of a loaded halftrack (particularly with the high points cost of the halftrack)
I currently see only a couple of uses for that ability;
1) If I make a serious mistake with the halftrack, the passenger can get a final shot off just before the halftrack gets blown to bits by an enemy tank.[:p]
2) If a "quirk" in the Line-of-sight on the map, creates a hex where my halftrack has LoS to enemy infantry, but no enemy anti-tank units have LoS to the Halftrack. Then it would be a nasty tactic to keep a halftrack loaded with an MG-42 or Mortar to exploit that LoS. Note; An MG-42 on a halftrack is a better anti-infantry weapon than a tank, because the MG-42 has double-shot. The Mortar is better, because it ignores terrain.
| | | |
|
Retired Tank
Vulturedoodle
Sergeant
791 Posts
| | 07/25/2005 10:42 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by XAos
I don't think "Fighting platform" is a generally beneficial ability. In most tactical positions the infantry are going to be safer if they unload in the movement phase. Or it will be better using a tank instead of a loaded halftrack (particularly with the high points cost of the halftrack)
It's better than not having the ability, I suppose. I think that the standard use for them will be knocking out AT guns, of all things, using the PanzerBush method. Approach the gun out of LoS to within 4 hexes, loaded with infantry. Sprint the last 4 hexes, infantry dismounts, then assaults the guns, which never get to fire. The rules may have to be errataed to state that movement in the same hex is identical, for defensive fire purposes, to movement from one adjacent hex to aother.
And even that wouldn't help vehicles, which get no defensive fire against Soldier units. This is gonna make for all sorts of goofy, unreasonable situations. But that's the old, old complaint about sequential move-and-fire games.
Regards,
Steve F. | |
Vaughan: You seem like a thinker. You seem to always be deep in thought. So what are you thinking right now?
Karl: I'm thinking I could use some more o' that potted meat, if you got any extry.
H/W List <|>Trades
| |
|
Dr.Cornelius
Warrior
338 Posts
| | 07/25/2005 11:49 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Vulturedoodle
Sprint the last 4 hexes, infantry dismounts, then assaults the guns, which never get to fire.
Only skimmed the rules, but I thought fire was simultaneous. Thus, the AT gun would get to fire on the assaulting infantry before casualties are taken.
Note that Halftracks are meant to move infantry quickly, give them some protection against other infantry and provide covering fire. Halftracks are very vulnerable to AT guns & Tanks and must avoid them if at all possible.
I think the Firing Platform ability could be useful against opposing infantry.
It will be interesting to find out how well the point values are balanced between infantry, armor and support pieces. It is likely that one class is vastly underpriced, leading to either all armor, all infantry or all artillery builds being dominant. Hopefully the game will capture some of the benefits of combined arms, but I am concerned that the construction rules do not place any restrictions on force composition. | |
| |
|
Retired Tank
Vulturedoodle
Sergeant
791 Posts
| | 07/25/2005 2:54 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Dr.Cornelius
Only skimmed the rules, but I thought fire was simultaneous. Thus, the AT gun would get to fire on the assaulting infantry before casualties are taken.
Note that Halftracks are meant to move infantry quickly, give them some protection against other infantry and provide covering fire. Halftracks are very vulnerable to AT guns & Tanks and must avoid them if at all possible.
Sorry...by "never gets to fire," I meant against the approaching halftrack. And with respect, if I may make a correction: Halftracks are supposed to be very vulnerable to AT guns & Tanks. That's my point.
Your closing statement is exactly why I mean this will lead to unrealistic situations. The sprint/dismount/assault method forces the AT Gun to fire against the infantry, never at the halftrack. The difference is perhaps 3-4 dice against Soldiers (with a defense of 3 or so) as opposed to 10-12 dice against the halftrack (with a defense of 2).
It's even sillier against tanks: sprint up, dismount, assault with infantry. No defensive fire at all. Gonna hafta be very careful with your tanks if there's a loaded halftrack or two in the area.
Regards,
Steve F. | |
Vaughan: You seem like a thinker. You seem to always be deep in thought. So what are you thinking right now?
Karl: I'm thinking I could use some more o' that potted meat, if you got any extry.
H/W List <|>Trades
| |
|
XAos
Underboss
2413 Posts
London
| | 07/26/2005 5:14 AM |
| The target of this sprint & unload attack, may not get defensive fire. But it will certainly get to fire in the assault phase. So it's likly to be a mutual kill. And the defender should have the advantage of cover.
A problem could exist if infantry-flamethrowers have an effective attack at 1-hex range. An ability to "Immediate" kill the defender, could result in the tactic of using a swarm of jeeps all carrying flamethrowers. And I don't think even hollywood has ever shown an attack by a dozen jeeps all driven by maniacs with flamethrowers. Unless we count the "mad-max" movies.[:o)] | | | |
|
Dr.Cornelius
Warrior
338 Posts
| | 07/26/2005 7:23 AM |
| I'm 99% certain that clever players will develop an abusive strategy that exploits a rules loophole or undercosting. The success of the skirmish game will depend on how willing and able the R&D team is to step in and fix the inevitable issues. A little errata early in a game is no big deal. But broken warbands that dominate the scene tend to turn off players (witness the dominance of chaotic evil orc warbands in D&D minis for the last two years).
| |
| |
|
Avatar of the Tank
Newtoncain
Commander
2985 Posts
Land of 10,000 taxes
| | 07/26/2005 7:30 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Dr.Cornelius
I'm 99% certain that clever players will develop an abusive strategy that exploits a rules loophole or undercosting. The success of the skirmish game will depend on how willing and able the R&D team is to step in and fix the inevitable issues. A little errata early in a game is no big deal. But broken warbands that dominate the scene tend to turn off players (witness the dominance of chaotic evil orc warbands in D&D minis for the last two years).
It wont matter because there are so many WWII enthusists out there. They'll just want to play. Now if a tourney sceen comes about, you may be correct. | |
They just don't know what's good in life...Conan, tell them what is good in life.
To rip the boosters. To count the minis spilled out before you, and to hear the indifference of the women... | |
|