Author Topic: Infantry in ISW: Worth It?  (Read 2390 times)

SCC

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8392
Infantry in ISW: Worth It?
« on: 08 June 2016, 02:33:25 »
OK given how poorly infantry tend to do in BT in general, and the fact that the actual role of infantry IRL isn't modeled in ISW, I have to wonder if it's worth raising regiments of infantry when you create new Combat Commands. So what do people think?

The Purist

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 448
Re: Infantry in ISW: Worth It?
« Reply #1 on: 12 June 2016, 13:57:30 »
In my opinion, yes, but it needs tweaking. Infantry in BT and thus AS, BF, SBF and up into ISW are very abstracted and almost an after thought. This abstraction is noted in various rulebooks and players are admonished to not to sweat the details and just go with it.

We revamped infantry via the Tech Manual and then added in actual trucks (motorised) or APCs (mechanised wheeled, track and hover). We ended up with Foot and Jump infantry only, the generic motor, mech and hover classification are discarded in favour of more 'crafted' companies and battalions. In the end our BF and Scaled SBF infantry is based on a 5 Element hybrid lance (foot infantry platoon and four carriers - trucks or apcs).

And, yes, they are more expensive but also somewhat more capable.

It's not canon but it has a better feel.

Cheers.


Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assault of thought upon the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

"...Remember also the two "prime directives" in playing BattleTech:
1. HAVE FUN
2. DON'T LET YOURSELF GET SO CAUGHT UP IN THE RULES THAT YOU STOP HAVING FUN"
Page 168 - Reunification War

ScrapYardArmory

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 316
    • ScrapYardArmory
Re: Infantry in ISW: Worth It?
« Reply #2 on: 13 June 2016, 07:14:34 »
Thinking about this, I think one potential use could be as a distraction/confusion element.

Since they are relatively cheap, a defender could flood the PCM with them, forcing an opponent to devote a large portion of their forces to Recon to keep tabs on what is/is not infantry.

Meanwhile your heavier units could be the wolves stalking in the flood of radar blips ready to pounce when they can achieve local numerical superiority.

Not sure if it would work in reality, but it is an interesting strategy to try out.

The Purist

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 448
Re: Infantry in ISW: Worth It?
« Reply #3 on: 15 June 2016, 13:53:02 »
Quote from: ScrapYardArmory
...Not sure if it would work in reality, but it is an interesting strategy to try out.

It might, the first couple of time you try it. However, I tend to land on a planet and head for the objective rather than swanning about the country swatting at units. This forces the enemy to react to my moves. I tend to use medium mechs and tanks so mobility is usually high with ability to avoid trouble (most of the time).

Infantry as found in 1st SW now looks to have transport units to carry them so with 6w or 9h movement a regiment placed in a Formation with light mech or light tanks definitely has a role, even if just armour points to absorb hits. A formation of 4 infantry and 4 transport Units can also be used as a roadblock alongside a second Formation of 8 heavier  Combat Units . With 6w many mech and tank Formations may not be able to avoid them in the movement phase. Infantry could pin an enemy force, forcing it to fight at least one turn. If an enemy wants to disengage and move on for the next turn it would have to win it engagement role in the end phase but the current turn's move is lost.
Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assault of thought upon the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

"...Remember also the two "prime directives" in playing BattleTech:
1. HAVE FUN
2. DON'T LET YOURSELF GET SO CAUGHT UP IN THE RULES THAT YOU STOP HAVING FUN"
Page 168 - Reunification War

 

Register