Campaign & Skill Advancement

[Captain Punka]

(Hopefully I'm posting this in the correct forum.  I looked around and saw no other other obvious place.)

I'm playing through the campaign rules (Dawn of Jihad campaign using the Warchest system).  The cost to increase the skills of conventional infantry seem abnormally high.

Improve MechWarrior Skill = 200 SP
Improve Conventional Infantry Unit Skill = 500 SP

Improving the skill for a mech is going to be a lot more impactful than increasing conventional infantry skill.  Plus, the way the campaign rules work the 'mech pilot is much more likely to survive each scenario.  So, I'm curious why increasing the skill of a 40-50 PV unit is so much cheaper than increasing the skill of a 5 PV unit.

Can anyone shed light on this?  Is this cost a mistake and increasing CI skills should be much less (like a whole lance for 500 support points)?  Or is there a game balance thing I'm not noticing why increasing the skills of conventional infantry should be so high?


**Update** - I noticed the Total Warfare rules of the Warchest system upgrades an entire platoon for this 500 SP cost.  And since 4 squads (aka "units") make up a platoon (aka "lance"), it seems like the correct cost should be 500/4 = 125.  Thoughts?

[nckestrel]

A unit of infantry (one record sheet, moves as a single unit) is almost always a platoon in BattleTech.  So that cost is for a platoon.
I believe the reason why it’s so high might be that you are increasing the skill of so many people (an entire platoon) and not just a single MechWarrior. Not saying I agree with it, but that’s the only reason I can think of for it being so high.

[Captain Punka]

Thanks nckestrel!

I think I got confused with the following from the alpha strike rules:

Infantry Formations
     Squad (Conventional) 2-8 troopers Corporal
     Platoon (Conventional) 3-4 squads Sergeant
     Company (Conventional) 3-4 Platoons Captain

I was thinking that when I print out a stat card from the MUL, for example, "Foot Platoon (Rifle)" [Dmg 1/0/0, Armor 2, Structure 1], that this stat card represented a "squad" of 8 troops above.  But instead, I think I'm coming to learn that a stat card represents an entire "platoon" above of 24-32 troops.

Is that correct?

If that's the case, a "Company" of infantry seems a little off from a numbers standpoint from a normal Company.  In other words, if an entire platoon = 1 unit, and 4 platoons = 1 company, then the entire company would be represented by just 4 bases.

[Captain Punka]

OMG, I feel so dumb.  "Platoon" is right in the name of the stat card I referenced.  So, I guess a base/miniature on the table does represent an entire platoon and not squad.  <face palm>

I guess my question regarding a "company" is still valid.  Is it just that a company of infantry is not the same as a regular company consisting of lances, etc.?

[nckestrel]

Yes, a company of infantry would be 3-4 BT/AS units (platoons).  Not 12 infantry units.

AFAIK, somebody in universe would see a platoon as equivalent to a lance, and a squad as equivalent (organizationally, not in power) to a single 'mech.  They don't see "units", that's a gameplay term/use.

[Captain Punka]

Makes sense!  Good luck to that commander who thinks that 8 guys with laser rifles can take on a mech!  :D

Thanks again for your input!  Much appreciated!

In the campaign, we might play around with using 125 SP (house rule) to skill advance conventional infantry because priced at 500, it's just an option that will never get used.

[Weirdo]

Nobody has ever suggested that an infantry squad could feasibly take on a mech in battle.

There is no connection between being equivalent in combat power, and equivalent on an organizational chart.