Wobby Battle Armor and Tac Ops

[ScannerError]

Can Quad do a trashing attack? I thought that required hands.

From the rules on page 151 of Total Warfare, there's nothing that says it requires hands or arms (a bit of flavor text implies the use of the mech's arms, but they aren't listed as a requirement to thrash). 

[Sami Jumppanen]

From the rules on page 151 of Total Warfare, there's nothing that says it requires hands or arms (a bit of flavor text implies the use of the mech's arms, but they aren't listed as a requirement to thrash).

Well, i'm quessing that this was changed to improve Quads chances against BA but i may be confusing the whole thing to that other anti-BA attack that definitely demands hands.

[imperator]

Whether it's a good choice or not isn't the point, it's just an example that going to range 0 isn't always useful, which was one of the possibilties you asked about.

And the Purifiers can kill more than 6 PBIs per turn. As infantry, the battle armor don't have to mess with the non-infantry vs infantry table on p216 TW, so their 'Mech-scale weaponry inflicts full damage - I can't say that I don't sometimes think that they should be counted the same as a 'Mech- or vehicle-mounted, and have played it as such, but sadly that's the rules. Assuming canon configurations, a full Purifier level I armed with ERSLs could inflict an average of 12 damage and a maximum of 18. With custom configurations, which offers the possibility of MRRs or Heavy Flamers, then the PBIs just got very dead.

WHAT!!!!!  I thought Anti-mech weapons on PA worked the sames as when mounted on a mech.  Where does it say that BA doesn't follow the conversion rule.

[Maelwys]

WHAT!!!!!  I thought Anti-mech weapons on PA worked the sames as when mounted on a mech.  Where does it say that BA doesn't follow the conversion rule.

They do, I'm not sure where Sillybrit got that from (though when TW first came out, there was confusion).

Page 215 of TW says "Once a non-conventional infantry unit has made a successful attack against a conventional infantry unit, consult the Number of Conventional Troopers Hit columon on the Non-Infantry weapon Damage Against Infantry Table"

Admittedly, that entire passage is sort of odd. It seems to ONLY be talking about non-conventional infantry. It doesn't actually seem to say anywhere "Do this when a `Mech attacks conventional infantry." Quite strange. You'd think that first line should be "When anything but a conventional infantry platoon makes a successful attack on a conventional infantry unit..." But I digress.

So yeah....ERSL = Not many dead infantrymen :)

[sillybrit]

It came from p213 "As defined under Units (see Components, p. 20), in these rules the term infantry refers to any infantry unit, whether conventional or battle armor" combined with p216 "Damage done by one infantry unit to another always equals the standard damage inflicted; it cannot be reduced by using the Non-Infantry Weapon Damage Against Infantry Table". So by those rules, because p216 doesn't specifically differentiate between infantry types, then it applies to all infantry.

This has long been recognized as clashing with the p215 Attacks Against Conventional Infantry rules with the argument swinging back and forth. I prefer the p215 interpretation, which I think came up way back in one of the earlier BAotW articles (IS Standard, GD Standard, Sloth, somewhere around there), but recently I've been running into more and more players opting for the p216 interpretation as the correct one. It does have the advantage of avoiding peculiar circumstances such as battle armor equipped with a small laser and wielding an infantry MP Plasma Rifle in gloves able to do more damade with the latter than the former, for example, even though the laser is a more damaging weapon and both are energy weapons.

As is my wont when questions like these pop up, I did some digging in Rules Question threads and it looks as though Xotl recently declared on the p215 side, so the rules are presumably going to be cleared up in a future TW printing.

[Crunch]

Where would field guns fall in that discussion?

[StoneRhino]

It looks right. I remember using some of the stuff out of maxtech to make infantry platoons broken into squads a real pain in the butt to kill. It is a great way to shut down certain pathways that you want protected. They would make for great spotters as well. The only downside is that you are now stuck in that spot, but again if you want that area shut down then thats no big deal.

This is why it is always good to have some kind of artillery around. They can sit there all day, at least until the arty starts to rain. I always liked the cannons over the standard artillery, but even that could be adjusted enough to kill them.

hard to root out infantry units are not impossible to kill. At the same time they are not useless. It is all just another option to play in a game.

[Maelwys]

It came from p213 "As defined under Units (see Components, p. 20), in these rules the term infantry refers to any infantry unit, whether conventional or battle armor" combined with p216 "Damage done by one infantry unit to another always equals the standard damage inflicted; it cannot be reduced by using the Non-Infantry Weapon Damage Against Infantry Table". So by those rules, because p216 doesn't specifically differentiate between infantry types, then it applies to all infantry.

This has long been recognized as clashing with the p215 Attacks Against Conventional Infantry rules with the argument swinging back and forth. I prefer the p215 interpretation, which I think came up way back in one of the earlier BAotW articles (IS Standard, GD Standard, Sloth, somewhere around there), but recently I've been running into more and more players opting for the p216 interpretation as the correct one. It does have the advantage of avoiding peculiar circumstances such as battle armor equipped with a small laser and wielding an infantry MP Plasma Rifle in gloves able to do more damade with the latter than the former, for example, even though the laser is a more damaging weapon and both are energy weapons.

Ahh, now I remember the second half of the argument. That's odd. I could've sworn I, or someone else, asked this question years ago and got an answer, saying BA used the non-infantry damage for it. Maybe its something that got answered, but never made it from the Rules questions forum to the Errata.

[Cik]

i always bring at least one of my 'mechs with inferno SOMETHING, for this reason (and others) if you are not carrying inferno or area denial weapons, you haven't formed your force correctly in my opinion.