Expanding infantry/BA roles

[worktroll]

Okay, I confess I have a 'thing' about BA, and by comparison to most units, BA do sort of lose a lot of their differentiation when folded down into Alpha Strike.

So here's a thread to play with ideas which might restore a little of the lost flavour for BA, and by extension, some of their less-crunchy, more-squishy infantry brethren.

New unit role - Infiltrator[/i] (the aggressive Ambusher). For units with STL, MAS, or LMAS, and minimum 4" (or 6"?) movement. Infiltrators can use hidden setup within 12" or 18" of the attacker's entry edge. Takes a little more care when on terrain than on numbered hexes, but having hidden spotters, or the like.

New AS formation - "Ambushers", ideal role (duh) ... can set up within 12" or 18" of the defender's entry edge.

New AS property - "crowd clearance". For units with MGs/flamers that do increased damage to unarmoured infantry. Do double rated damage (0* becomes 1).


Thoughts?

[Scotty]

I'd personally work it as Infiltrators being a Lance type with ideal role Infiltrator (I do like that unit classification, but not the inherent ability that comes with it), and having sub-types called... I dunno, "Advance Scouts" and "Deep Recon" respectively.

I'd call the new property a new Special, nomenclature "AI#/#/#" where units making attacks against infantry units deal additional # damage to those units.

EDIT: NOTE: This is what I'd do, that doesn't mean it's what should happen. O0

[Tai Dai Cultist]

A good way for making rules for ambushers is to play with the hidden units rules.  No need to reinvent the wheel.  Have an ambush lance get to use hidden units even when those rules aren't otherwise in play for the scenario,  or such.

[Pa Weasley]

New unit role - Infiltrator[/i] (the aggressive Ambusher). For units with STL, MAS, or LMAS, and minimum 4" (or 6"?) movement. Infiltrators can use hidden setup within 12" or 18" of the attacker's entry edge. Takes a little more care when on terrain than on numbered hexes, but having hidden spotters, or the like.

New AS formation - "Ambushers", ideal role (duh) ... can set up within 12" or 18" of the defender's entry edge.

I like the gist of both of these but they're a bit too dependent on being declared either the defender or attacker for my tastes. Maybe just a blanket 12" from the controlling player's home edge.

New AS property - "crowd clearance". For units with MGs/flamers that do increased damage to unarmoured infantry. Do double rated damage (0* becomes 1).

Why create a new special when you can just have HT#/#/# do an additional one damage against units with the CI unit type? Possibly BA as well, just to make things interesting.

[Scotty]

Because Machine Guns and Small Pulse Lasers don't do jack shit for the HT special, and they're some of the best anti-infantry weapons around (which is not reflected in AS at all).

Also I'm 90% sure that units with HT already do additional damage to units that don't track heat.

[Pa Weasley]

Very true, I was just trying to work within the existing conversion process.

And yes, the HT special adds damage to non-heat tracking targets instead of heat. I was just trying to play to the hella nasty AI capabilities of various flamers and plasma weapons. (And I'm very aware of the hypocrisy of embracing one weapon's AI abilities and ignoring another.  hush now.  ;D )

[worktroll]

Pa's just upset because his manager won't let him use a Salamander suit in his day job. ;)

[Pa Weasley]

Stupid "health and safety" and "lawsuits".

[ActionButler]

I'd call the new property a new Special, nomenclature "AI#/#/#" where units making attacks against infantry units deal additional # damage to those units.

100% support.  I even agree with the AI designation (I was actually playing with this idea earlier today and naned it that same exact thing).

There is almost no reason to take MG Elementals rights now.  They really need a boost.

[Pa Weasley]

It would actually be really easy to set up if PNT didn't apply to standard and ER small lasers and ER micro lasers in addition to the pulse varieties as well as machine guns and flamers.

[Scotty]

Machine Guns of all stripe, Small Pulse Lasers, and AP Gauss are what it would affect that aren't already included in HT, no?  There are a couple different ways to do it.

Option 1) Keep HT the way it is, add AI using only the above weapons.  HT and AI are cumulative when attacking conventional infantry units.

Option 2) Recalculate weapons that are already included in HT to include them in AI, such that AI is the only thing you need to care about when attacking conventional infantry units.  Possibly even including normal weapon damage for the unit.

I'd be inclined to measure it based on the number of d6s added.  A Flamer would add 0.4, while a Machine Gun would add 0.2.  Plasma Rifles would contribute 0.2 toward AI (since their full point of damage is already included in a normal attack, too), Plasma Cannons 0.3.  Round it like IF, so you can end up with AI0*/-/- for single Machine Guns or Flamers.

That'd be if you keep the normal attack damage.  If you don't, it gets a little more complicated.  Flamers are 4d6, while the average result on a d6 is 3.5, so Flamers would contribute 1.4 AI each.  This... seems pretty lethal, before I remember that Flamers are pretty capable of taking out entire platoons by themselves in standard BattleTech, too.  A weapon suite composed of three LMGs, two Flamers, and a Plasma Rifle would see an AI value of 6/2/0, to be used when attacking infantry platoons (1.7 from the Plasma Rifle [short and medium], 1.4 from each Flamer [short only], .35 from each LMG [short and medium]).

Basically, keep AI damage to the normal number of dead PBI, divided by 10.  A Gauss Rifle, therefore, would deal 0.15 AI damage.

[worktroll]

I like your maths. Although I'd keep AI and HT separate, as HT is its own gift that keeps on giving ;)

Case in point, the Buccaneer BNC-5W, with a plasma rifle backed by an MG array of three HMGs. Doesn't do enough heat to get the HT property, but ought to get a decent AI value - AI4/0*/0, I think?

[Pa Weasley]

Alright Scotty, I took your idea and played with it a bit more. Please don't hurt me. :)

I looked at burst damage versus conventional infantry (and the modified damage for plasma weapons) and did a quick #D6 average of the values. I've uploaded the conversion of all applicable weapons here.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/wzfv493yfrwltag/AS%20proposed%20AI%20damage%20values.pdf?dl=0

Like Scotty already mentioned, you would convert like IF. So round normally with values less than 0.5 and greater than 0 getting 0*. Of course the question become, would you add this to existing damage values or do in in lieu of existing damage. Just to toss out a few examples ...
CAR 5 Salamander BA (Standard):  2x BA Flamers = 1.1 * 2 = 2.2  * 3.5 (Troop Factor) = 7.7 rounded to 8 damage without adding to the existing 2 at short range.
CAR4 Amazon BA (MRR): 1 medium recoilless rifle = 0.7 * 3.5 (TF) = 2.45 rounded to 2.
CAR4 Grenadier (Heavy Flamer/Heavy Flamer): 2 BA Heavy Flamers = 2 * 1.4 = 2.8 * 3.5 (TF) = 9.8 rounded to 10 (!!!!!!).

What this does do is make poor old BA mortars actually worth taking. Possibly. In the end this is just a thought. Feel free to tweak, reject, or outright mock.

[Scotty]

I like your maths. Although I'd keep AI and HT separate, as HT is its own gift that keeps on giving ;)

Case in point, the Buccaneer BNC-5W, with a plasma rifle backed by an MG array of three HMGs. Doesn't do enough heat to get the HT property, but ought to get a decent AI value - AI4/0*/0, I think?

Well, depends on whether you want to keep normal attack damage (including HT), or consolidate it into one blanket AI value you use when attacking infantry (not including HT but also not applying HT).

Well, HMGs do 3d6 damage, which averages out to 1.05 AS scale damage at short range each, while a Plasma Rifle (which has HT 0.3 [though it arguably should be 0.35]) would be able to roast 17 PBIs on an average roll at short and medium.  I'd make it (4.85/1.7/0) for a total of AI5/2/0.  You can keep HT separate, but you wouldn't be able to apply it against infantry units.

Otherwise, you could treat the Plasma Rifle as doing an average of 7 dead PBI (on top if its normal 1 point of damage), for 0.7, which would end up as 3.85/0.7/0 and AI4/1/0.

I don't actually know what you could possibly need an AI higher than 2 for with Alpha Strike, since platoons tend to get very, very dead after 3 points almost universally if you're including it on top of normal damage, rather than instead of.  If you're including it instead of, you'd have an opportunity to represent how much harder it is to kill infantry with heavy weapons.

[worktroll]

The BNC-5W example is useful because it doesn't have enough heat weaponry to qualify for HT, but does burn through (pun intended) the PBI.  So I'd have AI stacking on top of HT. SO if you had a unit which already had HT2/1/0, but which would normally come out as AI5/2/0, I'd write it as HT2/1/0, AI3/1/0 - so if you attacked BA you'd get the extra HT damage, but attacking infantry you'd use the AI damage, plus the HT damage.

(Hope that made sense).

[Scotty]

The reason I'm not a particularly big fan of that method, worktroll, is that there aren't a whole lot of 'Mechs that will actually ever use AI.  Infantry in Alpha Strike are squishy.  Only the very, very toughest ever get beyond 3 points to burn through.  Anything that does 3 damage is already going to wipe an infantry platoon off the map, regardless of how much AI weaponry they're packing.

Unless that's tackled first, then AI is largely just a fun little thought experiment, or a slight improvement in the ability of lighter, faster 'Mechs to take care of isolated infantry platoons they should probably be avoiding anyway.

EDIT: Still a fun experiment, mind!

EDIT2: I think the best illustration for my point is the standard AWS-8Q Awesome.  3/3/3 means that no Awesome needs any AI whatsoever to deal with infantry platoons, and anything beyond that is frankly useless because it'll be totally wasted on an infantry unit that's already dead.

Switching to an AI based damage system, instead of making it a tacked on extra damage factor, means that the same AWS-8Q will suddenly be doing 0.255/0.3/0.3 -> 0*/0*/0* damage when attacking infantry units, making a supporting unit with a reasonable AI value a necessity in a well balanced game.

EDIT3: This could just be one of those spots where Alpha Strike blurs the distinction between some weapons in the interest of speeding up gameplay.

[Tai Dai Cultist]

I was thinking about the same issue, Scotty. But if the AI special was treated as an extra attack (like NARC or TAG) instead of a modifier to the regular attack (like AC or LRM) it'd be worth using.

[Scotty]

If that's the case, weapons with AI would have to be separated out from the normal aggregate damage, or they'd end up counting twice over the course of a single turn.

EDIT: and then you'd have to find a way to interact with Alternate ammunition types like AC or LRM or SRM.  Although... you could probably swing it so that if you use a full attack on a single Special like that, you're allowed to make a second attack on your AI special, so you can't accidentally double-count them.  Flamers, Machine Guns, AP Gauss, etc, aren't used in any sort of AC/LRM/SRM Special.

[Pa Weasley]

True, a whole lot of 'Mechs aren't going to need much in the way of any sort of AI but battle armor and some vees certainly could. But as you've already mentioned, you have to start getting into some TRO 3085 fun units to get something that'll survive more than three damage. Unless damage against CI unit types had normal damaged halved or some such to reflect their scattered nature. Given that they don't get a unit type to hit modifier like battle armor and Protos it might not be a horrid concept.


So, back to some sort of formation bonus for battle armor with "Ambusher" role?  ;)

[Scotty]

I think creating AI and giving it a valid purpose in the game would expand Infantry/BA roles pretty handily on its own, thanks! :D

But on the topic of formations that could use it?  I can probably think of a few.  Allowing Hidden Units would be pretty easy in an Ambush formation, though I think I'd have them deploy based on edge ownership, not attacker or defender.  I could also see giving some terrain bonus SPAs, for units that prefer to hunker down in woods and buildings (typical Ambushers).

[Tai Dai Cultist]

I believe that the ambush rules already should allow infantry to move as part of the surprise attack (nearly imposible to make surprise anti-mech attachs, otherwise).  Allowing infantry with the ambusher type to do so would be great compromise.

[Pa Weasley]

I think creating AI and giving it a valid purpose in the game would expand Infantry/BA roles pretty handily on its own, thanks! :D

By letting them die even faster.  ;D

[worktroll]

EDIT2: I think the best illustration for my point is the standard AWS-8Q Awesome.  3/3/3 means that no Awesome needs any AI whatsoever to deal with infantry platoons, and anything beyond that is frankly useless because it'll be totally wasted on an infantry unit that's already dead.

I'd be totally behind this. Heck, I'd extend it to make infantry be more like 0*/0*/0 with AI2/1/0 or the like. I suspect, though, that might be taking things further than the mandate AS has to "keep it simple". We risk incurring the ire of the Elder Gideon ...  :o

[Scotty]

I think infantry damage values are okay already.  I just also think that we should give 'Mechs distinct AI Specials in their Specials boxes.  You could even make using them instead of normal attacks an Optional Rule, to keep everybody happy (except whoever has to go through and update every card on the MUL).

[Pa Weasley]

Wouldn't be the first time a large swath of units, if not all of them, have had to be tweaked or updated.  #P But that's way off in one of many possible futures.

[ActionButler]

I'd be totally behind this. Heck, I'd extend it to make infantry be more like 0*/0*/0 with AI2/1/0 or the like. I suspect, though, that might be taking things further than the mandate AS has to "keep it simple". We risk incurring the ire of the Elder Gideon ...  :o

I really like the idea of giving Infantry an AI ability, but I wouldn't make them 0*/0*/0*.  I don't know what the fluff is, but I image each platoon/squad/point having at least one anti-armor/mech weapon. 

[worktroll]

That comes back to the old "I can shoot at your Abrams with a machine-gun all day" issues. I always object to a bunch of conscripts with bolt-action rifles being able to do any 'Mech-scale damage, but one-shot & support weapons are definitely sub-scale when dealing with Alpha Strike.

(New unit role - Atrocity/Crowd Control. Wherever the sum of AI and HT damage exceeds normal damage ...)

[Scotty]

I think we'd be crossing a line to implement "How I think infantry weapons should really work in BattleTech" to Alpha Strike. ;D

[ActionButler]

I always object to a bunch of conscripts with bolt-action rifles being able to do any 'Mech-scale damage

Agreed.

While we're on-topic, given the nature of it's loadout, I'm afraid I have to nominate my beloved Piranha as the first mech for the Atrocity/Crimes Against the Species SPA.

[GoldBishop]

of the original topic and giving Ambushers a Formation bonus as a qualifier...

Expert Lance Availability: BM, IM, PM, CV, SV, BA, CI
The Experts are elitests who have honed their skill to such precision that it leaves onlookers in awe.  Where many see overwhelming an enemy as the best means of felling them, the Expert believes in utilizing one or more precise strikes.
Requirements: An Expert must be able to see his target clearly enough and be able to apply enough damage to his mark.  A minimum of 1 damage at Medium range is required for any unit except for BA and CI; they must be able to deal 1 damage at Short Range.
Ideal Role: Ambusher
Bonus Ability: 50% of the Experts receive the Marksman special ability (p.54 ASC) while 1 other unit receives the SharpShooter special ability (p.56)

...there are two primary variations of the Expert Lance - the Melee Experts and the Weapon Experts

Melee Experts
Similar to the standard Expert, the Melee Expert is so finely attuned with his machine that they seem to act as one.
Requirements: in place of the Expert Lance requirements above, the Melee Experts require that 75% of the formation to possess the MEL special; if using BattleArmor or Conventional Infantry, they must possess the AM special instead.
Bonus Ability: Up to 2 units receive either the Melee Specialist, Zweiwander, or Swordsman Special ability (for BA/CI, this overrides the normal type requirements).  One other unit receives either the Melee Master, Fist-Fire, or Street-Fighter special.  Once chosen, the abilities remain for the scenario.  Each unit in the formation also receives the Dodge special ability.

Weapon Specialists
Where some prefer to generalize their damage through multiple weapon types, the Weapon Specialist places one particular weapon type above all others.
Requirements: Each member of this formation must possess a weapon special attack to qualify - AC, FLK, IATM, LRM, SRM, or TOR.  Each unit may possess a different weapon special type.
Bonus Ability: At the beginning of a scenario, choose either Cluster Hitter or SandBlaster.  At the beginning of each turn under the current scenario, up to 2 members of the Weapon Specialist Lance may receive the chosen special ability which will affect their weapon attacks this turn.