Author Topic: Clan Combined Arms  (Read 6506 times)

Darkside99x

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 41
Clan Combined Arms
« on: 22 February 2017, 09:13:14 »


I play Hell's Horses, one of the things that drew me to AS is that I can finally use my tanks and BA without bogging things down considerably.

The standard rules for clan force building are shall we say lacking from a Horse perspective and I reckon it will be a long time before anything official comes, would adapting the Comstar/WOB mixed lance approach with points be a viable (and fair) solution or how would you guys handle it?

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #1 on: 22 February 2017, 11:39:17 »

I play Hell's Horses, one of the things that drew me to AS is that I can finally use my tanks and BA without bogging things down considerably.

The standard rules for clan force building are shall we say lacking from a Horse perspective and I reckon it will be a long time before anything official comes, would adapting the Comstar/WOB mixed lance approach with points be a viable (and fair) solution or how would you guys handle it?

Have you looked into the Alpha Strike Companion force building rules?  They'll handle a mixed star such as mechs/tanks/infantry quite seamlessly.

Darkside99x

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 41
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #2 on: 22 February 2017, 15:56:59 »
I have but the default binary/trinary allows for only 1 star of Vee's and 5 points of BA's without taking Nova's (and no conventional infantry) and arent allowed to mix unit types within a star unless I have really missed something lol.

10 Vee's may seem like a lot but I have almost 2 trinaries of clan armour, and nearly as much battle armour which I get is too much to use in any standard game but the given options really dont have portray the Horse's well at all.

I know I dont HAVE to use the force building in the companion but the rest of my group is and I kinda want to incase I unbalance things too much.

I was asking more from that perspective, say I did the Horse mixed star of 2 mechs 2 vees and 2 BA that still qualified for a star type, would anyone have a problem with facing that?




Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #3 on: 22 February 2017, 16:45:38 »
I have but the default binary/trinary allows for only 1 star of Vee's and 5 points of BA's without taking Nova's (and no conventional infantry) and arent allowed to mix unit types within a star unless I have really missed something lol.

10 Vee's may seem like a lot but I have almost 2 trinaries of clan armour, and nearly as much battle armour which I get is too much to use in any standard game but the given options really dont have portray the Horse's well at all.

I think what you may have missed is that lances (or stars, which are the same thing under ASC rules) don't have to be homogeneous in Type.  (and I do mean capital T... as in "TP" on the card)
The rules allow you to build a star consisting of:
1 mech
2 tanks
1 5-man squad of elementals
5 protomechs
2 ASFs

Quote
I know I dont HAVE to use the force building in the companion but the rest of my group is and I kinda want to incase I unbalance things too much.

I was asking more from that perspective, say I did the Horse mixed star of 2 mechs 2 vees and 2 BA that still qualified for a star type, would anyone have a problem with facing that?

The force building qualifications don't care about type.  Just role.  2 mechs, 2 tanks and 2 BA squads qualify for all the same star types as 6 mechs would.  Role, role role... nothing but role matters :)

Darkside99x

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 41
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #4 on: 22 February 2017, 16:50:30 »
The lance composition section at the start of the Force building rules had me convinced that only Comstar and WOB could mix unit types within a formation, Il not complain though lol.

Cheers.

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #5 on: 22 February 2017, 16:54:52 »
The lance composition section at the start of the Force building rules had me convinced that only Comstar and WOB could mix unit types within a formation, Il not complain though lol.

Cheers.

Nope.  Mix and match to your heart's content.  Do keep in mind tho that some lances DO go beyond just Role, so take my statement upthread with a wee bit of salt.  Sometimes Size (SZ) also matters.  Occasionally they'll also mention that tanks should be deployed in pairs, but that's a restriction that is usually not going to stop you.  IE, it applies to "pure" vehicle stars, which you wouldn't be making if you're doing a composite star.

Also, you can mix and match infantry in your star w/o invoking the "Nova" rules.  IE you can include infantry as a core part of the lance.  However this does bring drawbacks, as most infantry are SZ1 Ambushers.  This may make it more challenging to meet your minimum % requirements for roles.  In other words, the main advantage of using the Nova rules is that your infantry don't count against you in meeting requirements.

Darkside99x

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 41
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #6 on: 22 February 2017, 16:59:12 »
Ok this helps me greatly.

Much appreciated  O0

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13687
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #7 on: 22 February 2017, 18:36:56 »
Also keep in mind that you can field more than just a Binary or Trinary.  That's the easiest equivalent to a Company you can make, but it's not the only thing you can do.

Also Novas are totally fine.  I actually have a group for my Falcon Cluster that is an ASF/Elemental Nova.  The fighters are configured with infantry bays; one fighter Star delivers two stars of Elementals. :D
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

Empyrus

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9102
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #8 on: 23 February 2017, 15:03:04 »
Pretty sure HHs wield vehicle-conventional infantry Novas, and i'd imagine they also use vehicle-elemental Novas. Indeed, Novas are fundamentally a combined arms force, probably the main form of that the Clans use.

ianpelgrim

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 70
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #9 on: 24 February 2017, 04:55:00 »
So on the Mixed stars and lances? If i build a lance with a Mech, a tracked vehicle , a hover vehicle and a squad of Battle Armor that follow the requirements of that lance it would be legal?
That makes Building Lances and fitting in infantry a lot easier.

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #10 on: 24 February 2017, 09:27:41 »
So on the Mixed stars and lances? If i build a lance with a Mech, a tracked vehicle , a hover vehicle and a squad of Battle Armor that follow the requirements of that lance it would be legal?
That makes Building Lances and fitting in infantry a lot easier.

Yep, and yep.

Also don't forget the favored role rule too.  Some BA units have the Scout or Juggernaut roles... they always qualify for inclusion in Recon and Assault lances respectively.

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13687
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #11 on: 24 February 2017, 11:10:09 »
Also don't forget that a couple formation types require paired vehicles.  Battle Lances, for example, require any vehicles included to be pairs of the same make/model.  Those are the exception, not the rule, however.

Also, the Ideal Role rule is not what Tai Dai just suggested.  Units with those roles do not automatically qualify for inclusion into those formations.  Rather, a formation made up of units exclusively of that role may automatically qualify.  For example: if you stick a Gray Death Scout squad into what you're trying to designate a Recon Lance, you can't do it.  But, if you make a Lance entirely out of Gray Death Scouts (or any combination of battle armor that have the Scout role), then it qualifies for the Recon Lance.

Here's the relevant text, bolded for emphasis.

Quote from: Alpha Strike Companion, pg. 149
Ideal Role
Some—but not all—formations may list an “ideal role” in
their descriptions. Ideal roles refer to unit roles, as they are
defined in the BattleTech conversions chapter, and serve as
a special loophole to any other formation requirements. If
all of a formation’s units possess the same unit role
indicated by
the formation’s ideal role listing, the formation’s requirements are
considered to be met, even if they might otherwise not be.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #12 on: 24 February 2017, 11:21:27 »
Ok, mea culpa on the favored role.  That's what I meant, but I grant what I said wasn't technically accurate.

However I will quibble with you on the vehicles.  You only have to pair them if the entire lance/star is nothing but vehicles.  If you have a mech, 2 tanks, and infantry, the 2 tanks don't have to match.

For example, the Battle Lance:

Quote
Requirements: 50 percent of the standard Battle Lance must
be Size 3 or higher. If the Battle Lance is a vehicle formation, these
Size 3+ units must also be pairs of the same vehicle model.
At least three units in a Battle Lance must also be any
combination of the Brawler, Sniper and/or Skirmisher unit roles.

Bolded for emphasis.

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13687
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #13 on: 24 February 2017, 11:37:12 »
QUIBBLE FIGHT! :D

A strict reading of the rules disallows mixed formations like that.  In fact, ComStar/Word of Blake are noted as specific exceptions to homogeneous units, and the text further goes on to mention that Clan Novas and "specialized formations such as the Support Lance" are also exceptions.  Battle Lances are not mentioned.

Quote from: Alpha Strike Companion, pg. 150
Lance Compositions
For the most part, Inner Sphere lances are considered
homogenous unit groups, composed of 4 ’Mechs, 4 combat
vehicles (of the same movement mode)
, or 4 groups
of infantry of equivalent type (battle armor squads or
conventional platoons of the same movement capabilities).
Likewise, Inner Sphere squadrons are often homogenous
groups composed of 3 pairs of aerospace fighters, or 3 pairs
of conventional fighters.
This same grouping by unit and/or motive type also tends
to apply to Clan formations, with each Star composed of 5
’Mechs, 10 vehicles (of the same movement mode), or 5 pairs
of aerospace fighters.
ComStar and Word of Blake Level IIs buck this trend.
Preferring combined-arms capability at even the smallest
levels of organization, these groups may be composed of
any mix of 6 ’Mechs, vehicles, infantry or aerospace fighters
(though the fighters almost always operate in pairs).
Beyond ComStar and Word of Blake, other exceptions that
exist to homogeneous lance/Star compositions exist in the
form of specialized formations such as the Support Lance, or
the Clan Nova formations.

The text clearly denotes what is and is not an acceptable break from homogeneous (by motive type) Lances.

That said, I think that's really dumb and you should mix and match however you want.  But in the specific example of the Battle Lance, where it mentions "vehicle formation", previous text clearly marks that Battle Lances are by default assumed to be homogeneous, and that strictly speaking mixed formations do not apply unless they are ComStar or Word of Blake in origin.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #14 on: 24 February 2017, 11:43:20 »
I'd quote the same text but instead bold the "For the most part" qualifier at the very beginning, meaning that what follows is typical but not mandatory.  It's all about the difference between "should" and "must" :D

Do you read that quoted passage as saying IS forces may field a lance of 4 mechs or 4 tanks, but may not field a lance of 2 mechs and 2 tanks?  This would also mean that Clan forces (CHH included) may not mix mechs and tanks in the same star as well... which in my reading it "clearly" must not mean this because it implicitly allows for stars to also violate homogeneity with the following text: "This same grouping by unit and/or motive type also tends to apply to Clan formations.."  (again bolded for emphasis)

I'm not Xotl or nckestrel, but I'd wager that's not the intent here.  Perhaps we need to take this to them in the rules thread.  Am I reading too much into those qualifiers?  I can't say... but I *can* say that hodge podge formations are part and parcel of large portions of BT eras like the late SW and the Dark Age and composite formations are pretty much the entire point of Clan military structure.  Seems silly to say you can't field them under AS rules.
« Last Edit: 24 February 2017, 11:49:50 by Tai Dai Cultist »

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13687
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #15 on: 24 February 2017, 12:00:48 »
I was 100% going to agree with you before I read that paragraph a little more closely and realized what it said instead of what I'd always just sort of assumed it said.  The part you quoted that says "also tends to apply" is clearly prefacing the existence of the Nova formation, which is explicitly mentioned as one case where the rules may be broken.  If "other exceptions exist" were followed by "some examples such as..." rather than "in the form of..." then I'd concede that it's a "should" and not a "must".  But there is little room for ambiguity here.

Like I said, I think it's really stupid, but part of finding really stupid rules is you can get them fixed.  That said, I think that the actual rules effect of this isn't "you can't field this formation if it is mixed."  I think it's "you can't get formation bonuses with this formation if it is mixed."  Which... is not the "fun" answer, but still lets those units be fielded.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

nckestrel

  • Scientia Bellator
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11030
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #16 on: 24 February 2017, 12:57:13 »
"for the most part", "are often", "buck this trend", "other exceptions exist".  Trends are not rules. None of that section is a rule.  That whole section is only saying what is most common, not what is required.

My non-official opinion. 
Alpha Strike Introduction resources
Left of Center blog - Nashira Campaign for A Game of Armored Combat, TP 3039 Vega Supplemental Record Sheets

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13687
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #17 on: 24 February 2017, 13:32:08 »
Then why include them in a rulebook at all? ???  The formations themselves go into detail on how to build them, and the table on pg. 148 gives an idea of how to fit Lances into Companies into forces on the table.  Having a section on the difference between Lances, Stars, and Level IIs makes sense, since the difference in sizes meaningfully impacts building formations; having a section on how most Lances and Stars are filled with homogeneous units does not, and (demonstrably) only generates confusion if that text can be safely ignored with no consequences.

Note: I agree with you in principle, but I think this section needs editing or cleaning up, since it's otherwise a sole island of fluff in a sea of rules.
« Last Edit: 24 February 2017, 13:34:15 by Scotty »
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

nckestrel

  • Scientia Bellator
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11030
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #18 on: 24 February 2017, 13:42:16 »
If ASC ever gets a reprint, and I'm in a position to do something about it, then maybe.  But both of those are looking unlikely any time soon.
Alpha Strike Introduction resources
Left of Center blog - Nashira Campaign for A Game of Armored Combat, TP 3039 Vega Supplemental Record Sheets

ianpelgrim

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 70
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #19 on: 24 February 2017, 14:27:03 »
I'm kinda confused now  :). if i build a lance with one size 3 brawler vehicle, one size 3 juggernaut mech, and 2 size 1 sniper mechs does that qualify for a battle lance?

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #20 on: 24 February 2017, 14:37:34 »
I'm kinda confused now  :). if i build a lance with one size 3 brawler vehicle, one size 3 juggernaut mech, and 2 size 1 sniper mechs does that qualify for a battle lance?

Well you're asking several things with that question, since SZ matters in a standard battle lance.  Without respect to SZ however (can a Battle Lance include only 1 CV rather than a matched pair of them) it appears that the wording is vague enough to give room for points of view supporting both "No" and "Yes".   If the arguments presented upthread don't settle it for you, you can ask in the rules forum for an official, sanctioned by TPTB answer.

With respect to Scotty's opinion, I do share the opinion that if we all could just make wishes to make things become better, the wording could use some tightening.  The way *I* read it, I can take 4 unmatched tanks and still call it a battle lance (assuming SZ and role are satisfied).  How? By not designating the lance a vehicle lance.  It's a "composite" lance that happens to all be tanks!  Shenanigansy rules lawyering perhaps, but it does serve a purpose in giving force building legality to an adhoc/provisional all-tank lance that doesn't happen to match motive type or come in matched pairs.
« Last Edit: 24 February 2017, 15:16:29 by Tai Dai Cultist »

Intermittent_Coherence

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1165
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #21 on: 27 February 2017, 15:59:48 »
Clan Combined arms?

You mean aside from using weapons on the left and right arms simultaneously?

Darkside99x

  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 41
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #22 on: 28 February 2017, 13:23:25 »
QUIBBLE FIGHT! :D

A strict reading of the rules disallows mixed formations like that.  In fact, ComStar/Word of Blake are noted as specific exceptions to homogeneous units, and the text further goes on to mention that Clan Novas and "specialized formations such as the Support Lance" are also exceptions.  Battle Lances are not mentioned.

The text clearly denotes what is and is not an acceptable break from homogeneous (by motive type) Lances.

That said, I think that's really dumb and you should mix and match however you want.  But in the specific example of the Battle Lance, where it mentions "vehicle formation", previous text clearly marks that Battle Lances are by default assumed to be homogeneous, and that strictly speaking mixed formations do not apply unless they are ComStar or Word of Blake in origin.


Exactly where my problems stemmed, I know BT is typically "do what thy will" in a lot of regards but it sometimes isnt that clear what is and isnt an actual rule and merely suggestion at times in Alpha Strike.
« Last Edit: 28 February 2017, 13:29:10 by Darkside99x »

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #23 on: 28 February 2017, 14:34:48 »

Exactly where my problems stemmed, I know BT is typically "do what thy will" in a lot of regards but it sometimes isnt that clear what is and isnt an actual rule and merely suggestion at times in Alpha Strike.

Take it for what you will, but basically I envision the writers meant to simply explain what is the normal tactical organization of the forces of the Inner Sphere for those who've never heard of BattleTech before picking up the Alpha Strike book(s).   I'm thinking the presumption was that not everyone comes into Alpha Strike knowing lances are 4, stars are 5, and level IIs are 6.  I'm thinking it's just a primer for noobs to the universe is all.  If you look deeper (say, into the CM series) there's nothing saying you have to field lances of 4.  A "lance" can include up to 10 or 12 units iirc.  (which is good, since a non-mech star will often have way more than 5 units)

nckestrel

  • Scientia Bellator
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11030
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #24 on: 28 February 2017, 14:41:05 »
I think he gets that.  The question is when does it cross the line into being a rule.  For example, the Battle Lance requirements are based on defining a vehicle formation.  If a vehicle formation definition is fluff, but the Battle Lance requirements rule depends on it, then there's some confusion.  Is the vehicle formation designation, if it's fluff, completely voluntary? And therefore the Battle Lance requirement for pair vehicles in vehicle formations also completely voluntary?
Alpha Strike Introduction resources
Left of Center blog - Nashira Campaign for A Game of Armored Combat, TP 3039 Vega Supplemental Record Sheets

soylentgreeen202

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Clan Combined Arms
« Reply #25 on: 14 July 2019, 09:44:09 »
Sorry if this is necro, but the fact that none of this was addressed in commander's edition is the exact point I'm trying to make. The rest is pasted from a from a Facebook post I just made to the BI:AS group. I was trying to figure out if I needed 10 clan tanks for a formation and ending up writing all of this.

Under "Formation Composition" on page 116...this wording has me pulling my hair out! It defines IS formations being "homogeneous unit groups" where vehicles share "movement mode" and clan formations have "grouping by unit and/or motive type". Does it mean to say that formations must contain units having the same TP, with CV types needing the same movement mode? Why differ the language based on IS/Clan context? Things like TP and movement mode are specific game terms, so what's the reason for the colorful language? Use the terms! :flame:

It also says these homogeneity rules are "for the most part" and "tends to apply". What is the rule! Tell me the rule! Is this wording just to account for the combined arms nature for Level IIs and Novas? Or is it actually rather flexible regarding TP as some have argued here? I put this in my FB post before even getting to the part in this thread where the exact thing comes up, so it might deserve some attention.

Also, I understand this universe is rich in fluff, but would it really hurt that much to write this entire section in terms of "units" and "formations", leaving the names specific to faction and unit type completely out? It starts off by saying you should know the "smallest combat formations...the lance, the Star, or the Level II" Ok sounds great. Except that WoB BA and CI Level I's, Points, and IS ASF lances are the smallest formations (in general sense) but do not qualify for formations (in game terms). Also that IS CV and BM lances do qualify as formations but IS AF lances don't, so when it says "lances, squadrons, Stars, and Level IIs built under these rules will receive...", it is misleading. Put this stuff in the combat manuals.

I'm not saying that these rules are impossible to interpret. However the actual rules being spelled out here in theory are very straightforward, but come across as such a bungle because of vague/arbitrary wording and accounting for faction/TP fluff nuances. I do think I need 10 vehicles to get a formation bonus. But I'm not really sure and I wouldn't have expected to comb through so much text to find out. This could all be illustrated in a small table: something I know Battletech loves to include so one more shouldn't hurt.