Battledroids Infantry for 2020

[Sartris]

that's the idea, yeah. it captures their general feel from battledroids - slightly dangerous and absolutely destined to become a smear on the field. i'm not looking to maintain any real balance vis a vis the current rules

though i am absolutely guilty of extreme infantry shenanigans, i'm generally of the opinion that they should be largely powerless in the face of mechs.

[Daryk]

I guess what I'm saying is that they're already there... those two additional suggestions remove even the "slightly dangerous" bit since they die so easily.

[Sartris]

indeed. i think going into combat without a modern combat vehicle with lasers and shit flying around should be profoundly dangerous

[Calimehter]

I’m aware this thread is a bit old now, but I was very interested in the concept when it was first discussed, and finally got a chance to try these rules out!  We used the rules as Sartris posted - including the add on rules from post #21 - with a couple of tweaks of our own:

- We gave all squads the “secondary AP weapon” option in addition to their primary weapon.  It doesn’t have +2 TH, but does do damage to all infantry types and any unarmored target, including internal structure exposed by earlier fire.  These can’t be fired in the same turn as the primary weapon.

- Foot infantry squads can carry primary weapons up to 250kg, but any weapons over 75kg cannot fire if the squad moved that turn.

- Burst fire weapons auto-destroy squads on a successful hit.

- Squads do not recieve a +1 TH modifier like Battle Armor . . . instead, they get a +2TH modifier, but only if in non-clear or non-paved hexes.

And one bigger change too - we allow for optional platoon deployment. Typically this will be 4 squads to a platoon.  Squads in platoon deployment get a single counter on the playing map and are treated as a single unit for movement and initiative purposes (while still counting as the surviving number of squads for stacking purposes).  All their weapons fire is resolved individually.  When being shot at, attacks against them are randomly assigned to individual squads in the same way as attacks on BattleArmor squads are randomly assigned to individual troopers.

The platoon deployment option is mostly for sanity’s sake for deploying large numbers to simplify movement and counter quantity while keeping the simplicity and independence of each squad.  It does also give a bit more longetivity to a platoon’s primary weaponry, as shots that hit may randomize into a squad that already lost their primary weapon.

--------------------------------------

We ran a simple scenario on a single mapsheet the other day to test these out.  A pair of Bug Mechs got a typical assignment to clear out a few enemy infantry squads that were holed up in some rolling hills  . . . normally a milk run for the Mechs, but things got interesting when a couple of well-armed motorized hover platoons showed up to help out their comrades! 

Mech Team:

1 WSP-1A Wasp (regular SRM ammo for simplicity’s sake)
1 STG-3R Stinger

Infantry Team:

2x Foot Squads with LMG
2x Foot Squads with LRM-4
2x Motorized Hover Platoons, each with 4x SRM-2 squads

I’m not going to write up a huge AAR-style report but I did attach a picture of the initial deployment.  The small counters are the foot squads, with the LMG squads forward to spot for indirect fire for the LRM-4 teams further back.

Both sides closed with inconclusive fire in the early turns.  On Turn 3 or 4 or so, the Wasp and Stinger got annoyed at the high target numbers from the earlier round and both refrained from jumping to get better target numbers . . . that worked to an extent, as they disabled multiple primary squad weapons in the hover platoons, but failed to an extent in that the Wasp got focus-fired and took a lot of LRM/SRM hits and ended up with 0 RT and LL armor along with some other scattered damage.

The Mechs reverted back to a “always jump” strategy after that exchange of fire and were (slowly) winning the battle of attrition, but the Wasp got cornered by the dogged hover infantry pursuit after losing a couple of rounds of initiative in a row.  The closest hover platoon was down to 3 squads that had no primary weapons left . . . but the secondary Auto-Rifles from one of those squads managed to score a hit on the unarmored LL and took out the hip and lower leg actuators!  8)

The Wasp went down, and the hover infantry swarmed over it to finish the job.  While that was going on, the Stinger jumped around and finished off the individual foot squads.

The denoument was the lightly-damaged Stinger and one of the hover platoons (the one that still had 2 squads left with SRM-2s) zipping back and forth in the relatively open space in the middle of the map.  The Stinger took a few more SRM-2 hits but eventually its MGs finished off the platoon it was facing.  The remaining hover platoon had no primary weapons left and the Stinger had no exposed internal structure, so game was called in favor of the Mechs, but only by a bit!

------------------------------------

One trial run does not equal a full analysis, but it was an enjoyable little game.   

In terms of battlefield functionality, these squads do die quicker than they would under TW rules, but they still have some staying power against non-burst weapons, and the flexibility and range of the squad weapon options (and ability to mix and match within a platoon) is really nice.

In terms of play, the squads are simple and dynamic to run and . . . it is hard to properly describe, but I really feel like they are doing a better job of “participating in the same game” as the other unit types when compared to my experiences with TW infantry.  Being able to wield weapons that don’t get abstracted down to a very short range helps with this, as does the fact that non-specialized weapons (i.e. weapons that aren’t burst fire or loaded with specialty ammo) shooting at infantry can have a non-negligible effect on them, even if they still struggle to finish them off.  They keep a unique feel without feeling like they are playing a completely different game than everyone else.

I also feel like they perform a bit more on par with their Alpha Strike/Battleforce equivalents, and open up some better ranged fire options in that game if you import the new primary weapon options over.  A minor point, but nice if you play both systems on a regular basis.

------------------------------------

To wrap up, I attached a blank copy of the record sheets we used.  Its nothing fancy and it would probably be easy to fit more squads on a page with a more efficient layout, but it is there if anyone wants to use it or improve on it.

Give them a spin if you get the chance!   :)

[Sartris]

super ****** cool

[Daemion]

SQUAD DESTRUCTION:
A successful hit on a squad destroys its anti-armor support weapon - some of the squad members may emerge combat-capable to perform spotting or other tasks. For each successful hit on a squad (including the first), roll 2d6. on a 9+ the squad is considered a mission kill and rendered knocked out of combat. Artillery immediately and completely destroys infantry.

Y'know.  Since it's for simple record keeping, you could generate 'Pogs' for infantry.  One side shows an active squad with its anti-armor weapon.  The other side shows the weapon is out of action. 

I'll look at your list in the coming days and see what I can come up with.

[Daemion]

This is an interesting compromise of the treating infantry platoons like Battle Armor squads (but with each squad being its own 'BA trooper' on the sheet), and my initial concept of Pog Infantry which are simple objective pieces to ferry around, put them at their place of function, and run an abstract side game with your objectives on the BT map.

So, instead of tracking bodies for AnInf purposes, it's a matter of 'truly destroyed' versus Anti-Armor Capable.  I like it.  You can go into detail with BA Squad deployment for character units, and leave the rest to a simple Yes/No/Maybe resolution.

I'm personally gonna look at RPG ranges for typical assault rifles when it comes to the AnInf range values.

[Daemion]

Just some catching up. 

You could probably justify cutting the motorized ones down to a single platoon (4 squads) per hex.  For jump and foot, stack away!

This makes me think there should be some tank shock ramming attacks or Mech Stomp Wading attacks if things get too piled on.

So... you could stack two squads with some other combat vehicle, but not three?  ???

BT Combat Tanks are rather voluminous in a lot of cases.  Not the same as 5-ton jeeps of whatever motive variety you're using.  That's what these are, effectively: BattleDroids Jeeps.

By the way, according to Sarna, you could stack 10 squads in a hex per BattleDroids.  Hence the idea for Pogs that could fit on the map.  The one MW:DA idea I can get behind, since it's on a map sheet and not an open table.

Personally, I like the added Infantry Survival/Destruction.  I might go so far as to add a little risk element to it, and have the attacker or controller roll on the crit chance chart, and modify that with the AnInf values of weapons as described. (I'd rather add the number to the die result, in that case, because the crit chance chart has set target values.  Unless I want to get funny and give infantry some minor armor values.)

And, when using infantry with just their rifles, I'd probably treat them as a MG for AnInf purposes.


But, the crit chance chart would have slightly different results:
8-9: Light Casualties - The Squad survives largely unharmed.  Support weapon is gone, but the remaining troops can move around and engage other infantry or spot for fire.
10-11: Heavy Casualties - Too many members are dead/wounded.  The Squad hunkers down to treat survivors and wait for extraction/surrender.  A couple people are still in good enough condition that they can keep an eye on events, and even spot for indirect fire/artillery.  But the squad does not move for the rest of the game.
12: Annihilated - If there's anybody left, they're wounded and effectively in no mood to fight.

That's for foot infantry.
For Motorized, I'd do something similar.  Remember that Jeeps in BattleDroids have hit points (5). I'm tempted to retain that, but treat it as SI on aerospace.  Sure, the last point kills the jeep.  But, it can still take crit effects before then. 

Whether you keep the hit-points or not, I'd implement a crit check table like so-
8-9: role mobility damage as per combat vehicles.  Ignore the driving skill results.
10-11: weapon destroyed.  The vehicle is still active and can move around generally getting in the way. 
12: Mission Kill - Crew's killed, or the engine caught on fire.  Be creative. it's done.

But, that's me. I get the simplicity you were after, Sartris.  And, that may work for some people.  But, I'm glad you posited some options.  On this sub-forum, seeing some of the thoughts and options are nice spring boards.  So, unless you're trying to make a hard and solid rule-set, I like seeing some of the options you thought of, whether you dismiss it later for yourself.

[Daemion]

So, when it comes to squad rifle ideas for ranges, I've lately been wanting to rope a bit more of the RPG into things. 

To give you an idea - The Standard Fed Suns rifle is the Federated Barrett.  The updated M42B has a Role Playing range of 30/75/180/430 meters.  Converting that to Armored Combat hex ranges, you get 1/2/6/15.  That's short/medium/long/extreme.  That feels about right for engagement ranges.  It would be hard to expect to land effective shots at extreme range, especially if the modifier is +6, like I think it is.

So, it wouldn't be that hard to give a squad those ranges, but only against other foot infantry.  Squads have the bonus of Mk I eyeball, which isn't fooled by man-pack ECM devices. 

Why don't all AnInf weapons get that kind of range boost?  Well, maybe the can!  It depends on how irregular you want your squads to be.  At the very least, the support weapon has some sort of ECM system built in to help protect it, in my opinion.  Once that's gone, however, the rest of the squad, if it survived, might not be protected, and easy prey to range-boosted weapons fire from armored units. And, because it's on a computer-controlled platform, I'd give it an even PPC/AC-5 range band 6/9/12/18.  Half-a-kilometer doesn't feel too unreasonable.

I'm inclined to relabel Motorized Infantry to IFVs.  They're dealt with as armored units, might as well go the rest of the way.  They are armored, and this is represented in the to-hit mods and ranges levied against them.

But, that's just me.

[Daemion]

I'm inclined to relabel Motorized Infantry to IFVs.  They're dealt with as armored units, might as well go the rest of the way.  They are armored, and this is represented in the to-hit mods and ranges levied against them.

Oh, yeah. I forgot.  I'd probably add the IFV type and keep motorized.

After all, we want our biker gangs.
Like that Tex Hex hover gang.
Or the Biker Mice from Mars
Or the Cowboys of... Moo... Mesa.

We need another motive type for 'motorized'!!  - Beast Mounted.

And, now that I think about it, we'll need a few others:
Amphibious/Boat
SCUBA/Submersible
Vacuum
Zero Gravity

And, if those COBRA flight pods are anything to go by: VToL
WiGE for those powered hang gliders

Am I forgetting anything?
Solar Sails?
Subterranean/Drilling?
Mountaineering!

And, at this point, we might simply call these 'Mounted - [motive type]  for simplification.  Though I imagine Vacuum and 0-G would be more a type of Jump.

Just because a game in execution may be simple, doesn't mean that's the same behind the design to getting there.

Aside: Seriously!  I'm hopped up on caffeine with only 3 hours of sleep, and what starts out as a joke reply turns into something serious real quick.

[Calimehter]

Aside: Seriously!  I'm hopped up on caffeine with only 3 hours of sleep, and what starts out as a joke reply turns into something serious real quick.

I feel you!  I've had these squads on my brain a lot since the little test fight we did, and I've got a few pages worth of material and optional rules that I'm still working on, and should have ready to post soon.  Some of it was done during a bit of insomnia too, I won't lie. :D

I won't go too far into it before its ready, but to address a couple of the points you brought up:

For secondary weapons: I stayed away from trying to integrate AToW/roleplay ranges (based off of more realistic ranges) into rules meant for Total Warfare (based off of much shorter 'game system legacy' ranges).  That's a can of worms in my mind, and causes issues even with the current TW rules.  More power to you if you want to try it, though.

I have included Motorized/VTOL, Motorized/Sub, and Beast-riders though I'm still fleshing out (ha!) that last one.

[Daryk]

Here's an idea... integrate the Damage Divisor concept into the destruction roll target number:
0:  -1 (these are your peasants with guns)
1: +0 (standard troopers with standard body armor)
2: +1 (standard troopers with GOOD body armor)
3: +2 (expensive and rare, but doable)

[Daemion]

Here's an idea... integrate the Damage Divisor concept into the destruction roll target number:
0:  -1 (these are your peasants with guns)
1: +0 (standard troopers with standard body armor)
2: +1 (standard troopers with GOOD body armor)
3: +2 (expensive and rare, but doable)

Front Line Infantry, I think you mean for that level 3.  ^-^

[Daryk]

It takes implants and/or genetic modification to get that high...  ^-^

[Daemion]

Really?  I just figured it took roids.  Lots and lots of roids.

[Daemion]

For secondary weapons: I stayed away from trying to integrate AToW/roleplay ranges (based off of more realistic ranges) into rules meant for Total Warfare (based off of much shorter 'game system legacy' ranges).  That's a can of worms in my mind, and causes issues even with the current TW rules.  More power to you if you want to try it, though.

I'm gonna. And, it's for infantry versus infantry only. Soft target against soft target.  Besides, 6 hexes for a long range isn't that bad.

[Daryk]

Really?  I just figured it took roids.  Lots and lots of roids.

It takes either a full body myomer implant or the Belter Infantry Package to get a free Armor Divisor boost...  8)

[Daemion]

Here's an idea... integrate the Damage Divisor concept into the destruction roll target number:
0:  -1 (these are your peasants with guns)
1: +0 (standard troopers with standard body armor)
2: +1 (standard troopers with GOOD body armor)
3: +2 (expensive and rare, but doable)

If we're gonna go this far, a couple other ideas hit me:
We can modify the auto elimination number further with troop training levels and loyalty quality, and a 'fear factor'.
(Not all the damage has to be physical for a squad to leave the fight.)

The 'fear factor'
This would be an augment to how Sartris propose applying AnInf damage dice as modifiers.  It would be another, similar conditional modifier based on what did the shooting at the squad. 
- Other conventional infantry - I actually see a bonus to the squad number, because it's not just being on even footing.  You can be confident you can take the other guy down.
- Vehciles - this is your +/-0.  An armored box with blind spots and weak points in its mobility, while frightening, is so abstract that the fear can be overcome, especially with training.
- Battle Armor - This is where you start to see unaugmented men sweat.  It's like a man, but sttronger, faster, and more resilient.  BA happens to be the smallest of the superhuman uncanny valley.
- ProtoMechs - Next step up in Uncanny valley combined with superhuman.
- BattleMechs - Giants with terrifying weaponry that run around the battlefield at sometimes inhuman rates of motion.  Watching even the slowest mech in action can boggle the mind when someone hands you a satchel charge and tells you to intercept it and plant that in the ankle.


Training Level
This would certainly play a roll in whether a squad hesitates out of confusion and fear.  Greener troops are more likely to feel overwhelmed and withdraw sooner than regular, veteran, or elite.

Loyalty Quality
The reason to stick around and fight will play a large part in how long a squad will submit itself to punishment before collectively the troopers decide it's not worth it anymore.  As I see it, this is how it's break down:
Fanatic troops are most likely to try to stick in the fight to the last man.
Poorly loyal troops will bug out at the first casualty.
Troops of Normal loyalty will give it that 'college try' removing from combat at probably half-strength while they have enough people to help haul wounded.

I'm not gonna futz with numbers right now.  Just making the suggestions.  If anyone wants to try to tackle modifiers, by all means.

I like this because it brings a level of morale into play which is intrinsic to a mob unit like infantry which is lacking normally.

Note On Design:
Now, if I'm gonna start playing with all that, I'm gonna not bother with the gradient damage levels like I'd proposed.  (We still could, but I'd leave that as highly optional.) 

So, sticking with the static target number is the key to KISS in this regard.  We can generate the modifiers as tables for reference in play, but aside from the conditional modifiers of Fear Factor and AnInf weapon effectiveness, the others are static, and once set, can create a final target value.

So, once you've determined if you're fielding mostly green/poorly loyal troops in standard kit, you'll have modified the final target value for auto elimination to something low.  Sartris started us off at 9+.  For me, auto elimination is like checking for a crit on Mechs or more thematically Aerospace.  You only need an 8+ with aero to do the damage.

If we set it up, we could work the numbers so that a green, poorly loyal squad with crap armor is auto eliminated every time.  That might be our starting point, and work up from there.  Which means our starting value would probably a target number of 2+, since the roll is checked on the ubiquitous 2d6 common in most things BattleTech.

edit: Making the post a little more purdy.

[Daemion]

Another thing to think about with chances at squad auto elimination: Body Count.

Yes, that's right.  If you have an auto elimination chance, you have to believe that it could fail perpetually. 
But, a hit is a hit in BattleTech, normally.  So, every time the squad takes a hit, someone's getting hurt, especially with the weapons fire being thrown around on the field of Armored Combat in the 30th and 31st and 32nd centuries. You're gonna run out of people who can get hurt.

Since we're playing with squads, the depth of body count isn't gonna be very deep.  I suggest we keep with the squad sizes shown in the FMs and Faction Books.  That'll usually be 7.  (The old House Kurita book actually had them running in squads of 10, so that could be fun to play with.)  Points of 5 for clanners.  How adherent is ComStar and WoB to the number 6 paradigm?

And, as I pointed out above, this can be modified by troop loyalty quality.  While a Kurita squad may have seven men, unless they're fanatic front-liners, they won't stick around to the last man.  A chain-gang suicide squad might break at the earliest convenience in order to go to ground and escape to better life.  Most standard troops are gonna be somewhere in the middle.

In fact, if we want, we could put the loyalty factor in the amount of hits a squad can take, and remove it as a modifier for the auto-elimination value.

Now that I have this little brainstorm out of my head, maybe I can sleep properly, now.

[Calimehter]

I'm actually going to start a different thread for my stuff, as it got to be quite a lot of material and I didn't want to feel like I was drowning out the good ideas being discussed in this thread.

I will obviously be linking to this thread and giving acknowledgement. :)

-Edit:  Link here - comments and replys in that thread are welcome!

https://bg.battletech.com/forums/fan-designs-rules/battlesquad-an-expanded-take-on-battledroid-style-infantry-rules/msg1919246/#msg1919246

[Daemion]

I'll probably do the same when I cement my own home brew version. 

[Daemion]

I'm actually going to start a different thread for my stuff, as it got to be quite a lot of material and I didn't want to feel like I was drowning out the good ideas being discussed in this thread.

I will obviously be linking to this thread and giving acknowledgement. :)

Do you mind commentary on your rules in that thread?  Or should there be a dedicated discussion thread?  Half tempted to comment here.

For the most part a lot of your stuff is what I expected. 
Interesting about not taking damage from outside weapons fire into a building.  I'm assuming that's for simplification.  Did BattleDroids have rules for buildings?
I'm liking the Engineering stuff and some of the extra motive types.

There are a few things I would personally do differently, but I've expressed that here already.

[Daemion]

On review, it appears I seem to be the most vocal about this.  It must be because I feel Total Warfare took the wrong approach to a lot of things, especially Infantry.

But, looking at what they were trying to do with the inclusion of Mechanized Infantry, and this thread bringing to light Old BattleDroids stuff, I think I can appreciate that MechInf were simply an attempt to update the old BattleDroids Jeep unit.

While a lot of people are okay with coming up with support vehicles to fill that gap, there's something about the BattleDroids Jeeps that standard combat vehicle rules don't have.  They're a class of soft-target vehicle that standard rules can't quite cover.  But BD Jeeps need a few refinements as well, and I want to include them.

I'll make a separate post exploring the ideas.

Aside: I'm surprised that with all the optional rules books, the PsTB didn't collate some of the older rule sets, such as BattleDroids, as advanced rules options. They're missing out. 

[Calimehter]

Do you mind commentary on your rules in that thread?  Or should there be a dedicated discussion thread?  Half tempted to comment here.

For the most part a lot of your stuff is what I expected. 
Interesting about not taking damage from outside weapons fire into a building.  I'm assuming that's for simplification.  Did BattleDroids have rules for buildings?
I'm liking the Engineering stuff and some of the extra motive types.

There are a few things I would personally do differently, but I've expressed that here already.

Replys and commentary are most welcome in my thread!  I'll post a clarification in there about that right away.

The building question I'll actually answer here rather than 'porting it over to the other thread, since it is a question anyone working with these rules will need to address. 

The reason I made special buildings rules is that the unmodified Total Warfare buildings rules turn buildings into an infantry deathtrap when using BattleDroid/BattleSquad style rules.  The problem is that the usual damage reduction applied to incoming fire from outside the building doesn't do anything to benefit them (since a hit of any kind just results in the same effect regardless of damage).  Being inside a building just makes it easier for them to hit you (targeting a stationary object) and affect more of you (all squads inside a building are impacted) without providing any actual protection!  Well, there is the protection from burst fire effects, I suppose, but it is a small benefit when compared to the significant downside.

In my basic rules, I went with a solution more tailored toward simplicity and ease of play.  It can perhaps make light/medium buildings a bit too good . . . but one has to remember, if such a lower-CF building is collapsed around them they are all auto-killed in my system, so squads still have an important "game-play" decision to make about staying vs. fleeing if they find themselves in a ligher or damaged structure.   

I am working on a more granular approach where shots that hit buildings have a genuine limited effect on squads (rolls to kill primary weapon instead of auto-killing it, and penalties to the roll to destroy the whole squad).  That will eventually end up in my Optional Rules section, though, just like most of the other higher-granularity extras I've added (like expanding the differences between different burst weapons and even cluster/missle Mech weapons).  The basic rules will always, for me at least, err on the side of "effective yet simple" though. :)

[Daryk]

Altering the auto-kill target number seems to be the easiest way to implement buildings, I think.  Combined with heavy armor, bunkers can actually make sense...  8)

[Daemion]

I am working on a more granular approach where shots that hit buildings have a genuine limited effect on squads (rolls to kill primary weapon instead of auto-killing it, and penalties to the roll to destroy the whole squad).  That will eventually end up in my Optional Rules section, though, just like most of the other higher-granularity extras I've added (like expanding the differences between different burst weapons and even cluster/missle Mech weapons).  The basic rules will always, for me at least, err on the side of "effective yet simple" though. :)

That was a suggestion I was gonna make: Make the support weapon destruction random inside buildings and defensive structures.

[Daemion]

Or!

We can flip things up a bit.  When attacking infantry in a building, you don't attack the building.  You treat infantry like any other combat unit and attack the unit.  And, infantry get a to-hit cover modifier based on class of building.

My suggestion for modifiers:
Light = +1
Medium = +2
Heavy = +3
Hardened = +4

So, yeah.  You get some decent cover, but the mech has some options. Take out the building or try to gun for the ... er... gun.


Aside: What's interesting about this for me is that I'd devised a demolition system where I took the BMR style of clearing woods and applied it to buildings, as well.  Less record-keeping.  The general result is that buildings would be knocked down by class the same way woods could be, until there was nothing left.  It showed how holes would open up and the building would be easier to knock down as its integrity was compromised. (Did I ever mention I hate life-meter tracking.)

Combining the two I could see tactics of opening up holes to simply take out the gun. Might even put in auto elimination rolls for when the building is targeted and collapsed a class level while infantry are in it.

[Daemion]

Just had a little brainfart storm for the squad elimination:

In BMR, you could effectively cut down trees by rolling less than or equal to the strength of a weapon.  Cutting down infantry would be like cutting down trees, in a manner of speaking.  How to give anti-infantry weapons a bonus and maybe handicap non-anti-infantry weapons is something I'm still up in the air about. 

Just a thought, instead of a target value like a critical hit.