Swarm Tactics...Without Being a Jerk?

[TigerShark]

Exactly that.  To really make the scenario accurate to the novels, the Stingers need to have very severe Moral penalties, Forced Withdrawl (it is, after all, prior to the 4th Succession War), and rules preventing them from voluntarily moving within somewhere between three and five hexes from Legend Killer.  They're not going to bum rush a Rifleman that suddenly appears, they're going to panic and flee while it cuts them to pieces.

Right. So, in essence, it needs to be a battle which cannot occur using the game's mechanics. It needs RP elements to function properly.

[YingJanshi]

You know, I wonder if a lot of the problems with swarm forces would be balanced out if the swarmee uses Forced Withdrawal? If instead of using his units like disposable weapons, he treats them as just as valuable as their 'MechJocks (or almost anyway)?

That's how I would. Surrounding a unit...sure I guess you could...but you would certainly lose several. If I were to use Savannah Masters say, I'd use them as screeners/harassers. Flying around the edges of the battle, darting in for back shots or targets of opportunity. Or say Scorpions or Vedettes. Sure, I'd have a full lance concentrate fire on a singe target. But that's still only 4 AC/5s.

I guess what I meant with my original post is how do you use swarms or swarm like units if you aren't intentionally trying to game the system. I wouldn't, simply don't find any fun in winning that way. Nahuris' game with the technicals is rather like what I was trying to get at. A full battalion of SM is just silly (though might be fun if everyone goes in knowing about it), but say two lances of SM supporting your 'Mech company would be find.

I guess I should have phrased my original question this way: How do you use swarms without trying to game the system?

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Right. So, in essence, it needs to be a battle which cannot occur using the game's mechanics. It needs RP elements to function properly.

Or TacOps.

Since the novels aren't written with the idea that all battles are fought in an arbitrary fishbowl with berserker warriors who always fight to the death they're not going to turn out the same as if you played with those forces on a game map.  It's something that really ought to be taken into consideration before saying that it's easy to win Scenario X.  There's a lot of factors that are different.  Heck, just the ability to sit back spend a minute thinking about which hex you're going to move to this round makes a big difference in how things will turn out compared to a battle that's being fought in real time.

[Nahuris]

MoneyLovingOgre4Hire is right ---- tabletop battles rarely turn out like those in the novels, or really, and real battle. When we play on a table, we really are putting warriors, willing to fight to the death, on a battlefield, with arbitrary magic lines, that define set edges, and where those same pilots agree to self destruct if they cross them (unit is destroyed if it leaves the edge of battle is very common) --- and so on.

Really, most battles in Battletech make no sense, as they imply that two units were randomly wandering the wilderness, and upon sighting each other, hastily make the above agreements and then slug it out to the bitter end, or last man standing. We rarely fight battles over objectives, and too many times, when we do, they objective is to either destroy the objective, or keep the other side from getting it, meaning that destroying it, is sort of a victory........ I have seen mechs ignoring other mechs firing on them, so that they can fire turn after turn at an objective...... because they win, even if almost everyone is dead, if the building blows.

In real battles, the goal is to keep as many forces alive as possible..... you don't just throw troops at an objective, unless you are a very poor commander.... you use your troops to obtain objectives and force your opponent to capitulate. and the less troops you have to use, or risk, at that means that less get wounded or killed.... leaving you with further resources to continue the campaign. If real wars were fought the way that 90% of tabletop games are played, the Houses would have been out of mechs and troops somewhere around the first succession war.......

The forced withdrawal rules are great, but too many players try to play loopholes or argue ---- and even when followed, really don't do much to truly simulate some aspects of battle. However, that takes this discussion in additional directions, than including Initiative, did....... really, it comes down, not to which units make the swarm, but how it is used on the table --- keeping in mind that those units are supposed to be piloted, and are probably NOT suicidal works better, then just using those units as though they are drones. Someone, earlier, posted that you need to expect to lose units ..... and in a game, yes, that is true, but for real soldiers, even one casualty is too many, especially if you are the one.....

I am a combat veteran, and yes, I have seen friends die in battle, as well as having been wounded, myself. The difference, is our command, and our leadership, tries to minimize that, as much as possible. It's still a job that deals with death, it happens, but your troops remain loyal, so long as they believe that their command has their best interests, and survival, in mind..... lose that, or spend too much time discussing "acceptable losses" and there is a real risk of an accidental misfire resulting in a friendly fire situation......... or your troops refusing to fight, or even considering surrender, depending on the enemy.

With my technicals, as I noted, one got destoyed, horribly, by the laser battery of the Stalker.... the rest immediately scattered.... because they didn't want to die, and it was suddenly VERY obvious that it could, and would happen. Now, there was no, in game, advantage to my scattering.... and from a tabletop perspective, having an 85 ton mech chasing 5 ton vehicles was very much a win....... and if I had played, as many tabletop players do, where the goal is to win at all costs, I would have kept the fight on the Stalker.... the odds are, one of them would have gotten one of those small lasers through, and I could have crippled an Assault mech, by sacrificing some cheap trucks....... and that is how too many games are played. I chose to use more RP, and experience of what real soldiers think, and while it did not give me an advantage on the table, it did make the game more enjoyable, for me.

Sadly, there are no rules for this part --- it relies on players on both sides to act as though their units have real pilots..... which some people just will not do.
During the game with the technicals, most of the players on both sides did kind of play it that way, to the point of some of them using Forced Withdrawal, even though we hadn't decided on it, at the beginning of the battle..... it made that battle much more of a battle, rather than a table game, where someone HAD to win.... and because of that, we all had a great deal of fun.......

Not sure how to rule it on the table, but it is something that has an important place in the game...

Nahuris

[Go For The Throat]

You make some very good, and true points Nahuris, but BattleTech is a game, so unless things like Forced Withdrawal or Morale are implemented and enforced, players have no reason not to simply suicidally charge with everything and never retreat. Especially if it is nothing more than the weekly 10k BV (or however you balance it) game, and they can just bring another 10k worth of units the next week.

[Kovax]

The problem is, playing a one-off scenario does not provide the same incentive to keep your troops alive as playing a long campaign.  If you only have one or two "veterans", a handful of "regulars", and anyone else you bring onboard will be "green" or worse, you start to protect those pilots and crews.

In a MegaMek/MekHQ campaign, I frequently bailed the crews of immobilized but still "effective" vehicles, because I would much rather lose the vehicle (or recover it after the battle) than have to start training up another green crew from scratch, and each vehicle crew typically consisted of one or two experienced personnel and a couple of newer recruits.  'Mech lances often consisted of one Veteran, one or two Regulars, and one or two Green Mechwarriors.  Again, the idea was to withdraw shot-up units, or eject from a crippled 'Mech to save the pilot, and spare the 'Mech (hopefully) for later recovery.

When you have no long-term reason to protect your assets, because the universe ends on the last turn of the battle, you don't care if you lose 90% of your troops and equipment as long as "you won".

[Col.Hengist]

I favor light mechs ---- and I rather like Pack Rats and other fast scout units ---- I'm a big fan of the old television series, Rat Patrol....LOL
I don't expect a light unit to try and slug it out --- it's the running completely away, and taking yourself out of any useful ability to your side, and only trying to be useful, on turns that you win initiative ---- I look for cover, and I plan my movement, ahead of time, so that I can maximize my cover and terrain advantages, while still contributing to my side --- if my opponent dispatches a unit, just to intercept, or guard against me, even if they never engage... then I have done something.
I don't like the totally jump away, so that you can't shoot me, because I am forced to move first, method.... there is always something you can do to either give your side an advantage, or take away an opponent's advantage.

And I can give another example --- in a game last year, against Col. Hengist. I was given the job of putting together a light militia unit with "technicals" to support a mech unit defending an installation. And while our installation made the decision to divest itself of defenders and take a walk on the map, I had put together a force that had matched the guidelines I was given. (At the start of the game, the installation went from being defended, to being placed in the center of the map, and the defenders had to race the attackers to their own facility.)

My force consisted of 3 flatbed trucks, with LRM20's, and old battered Shrek, 4 Scorpions, 5 "Avengers" - small 5 ton vehicles based on the Humvee Avenger, with two rocket10's and an ER Small Laser - 3 small light vehicles with a Light PPC each, 2 flatbeds, each carrying 2 LB2X's and 2 machine guns (based on 1960's Soviet anti air trucks), 2 squads of basic Inner Sphere Battle Armor and two tracked vehicles, fitted with a Thunderbolt 15 in a fixed forward mount. The Avengers and the small light tanks with the Light PPC's were the only fusion equipped units on my side --- the rest were all ICE vehicles. And this was in support of a unit consisting of approximately 4 lances of mostly medium mechs, with some heavies, and a few lights, but no assaults. We faced an opposition that fielded 4 Lances of mechs, with a lance of assaults, one lance of mediums, 2 lights, and the remaining 6, heavies. Plus 2 Karnov's with approximately 6 squads of the heavy Ravager Battle Armor.

Now, yes, I did swarm some --- I sent the Avengers out to harass a Stalker, but the difference is I kept them out of kick range..... and never tried to play blocker with them --- for one thing, my guys wanted to come home.... not be uses as sacrificial crash dummies. However, with 2 of them managing to get in back shots, and tear up most of the rear armor on that Stalker --- the player had to hold it back to avoid getting further backshots..... the rest of the rockets got spent on other units, as they rushed up some heavies to deal... and one of the Avengers was horribly destroyed by the Stalkers full Laser battery.  The remaining 4 would continue doing little slashing attacks with their ER Small Lasers, but making that Stalker cautious was more than I had hoped for.......

The rest of my units basically played area denial, and would pack rush anyone that tried to circle around one side of the objective ---- and fortunately, my opponents didn't do a concerted rush, because while I had a lot of units, most of them were "technicals" as in, only carrying a couple of tons of armor, if any, welded on...... and any hit over 4 damage would have spelled disaster for some of them .... the LBX trucks come to mind... they had one ton of armor each..... 4 up front, 3 on each side, 2 rear, and 4 on the "turret".

In the end, the game was a lot of fun for most of the people ---- although I could not figure out my sides desperation to die at the hands of the Ravagers .... they kept marching mechs, one by one, at a walk, up to one hex from the Battle Armor, and then would just stay there, trying to outshoot the battle armor..... made me so glad that once my ammo was running low, that my units were allowed to start running for the edge.

Nahuris

 I remember that game a little differently.

[Nahuris]

I remember that game a little differently.

I left the infantry battle out, as while it was central to that game, it wasn't to this thread --- the rest is off of the notes we took during the game......

Nahuris

[mike19k]

I think that the key to swarm tactics with out being a jerk would be to use them as if they are real people. Real people sometimes do things that are amazing (both on the dumb and good side).

My brother told me a story when he was in BN HQ Tank section that they stopped and were parked behind the TOC on top of a small hill just out side a wood line. A light (foot with only small arms/rifles and RPG's) infantry unit came out of the woods and seeing the commad post started up the hill to capture or destroy it. The two M-1's came pulling out from behind with three MG's going each the light infantry broke and ran, most did not get away. Had the infantry stopped and immediately returned fire they could have very possably killed the exposed  crew on the MG and mobility killed the tanks at the least, but they did not think of that when they were being shot at. Some also depends on who you are fighting, the difference in you culture to theirs. In WWII my understanding is the the Japanese culture thought that surrender was a terrible thing to do, so when people surrendered to them they were looked down upon the as they were not worthy of respect. If you are fighting someone who you know will mistreat or kill you if you surrender you are more willing to fight to the death, but if you know that you will be treated OK, and ransomed/exchanged back to your side with your mech you are much more likely to surrender.

[StoneRhino]

I have had some friends do some pretty obnoxious stuff in the past, which makes me less likely to be thrown off when someone brings something to the table others here would find to be cheap. "Swarm tactics" don't really mean that much in a game regulated by BV2 and without the rule to blow up your own mech in order to create little nuclear bombs. When you face a pack of ultra light mechs with clan heavy lasers that are supposedly observing Zel until they are nice and close to all of your units and start trying to blow themselves up, most swarm tactics are going to seem kind of tame.

Swarm units in a BV2 game are going to be weak. Either they are light units or heavier units with very bad pilots, either way they will not be able to do much on their own. You won't see head cappers on swarm units in most reasonably sized games. Most will not likely be able to deliver hard hitting physical attacks. Their armor is likely to be really light, meaning they will likely be relying on range or speed, rarely both due to increases of BV as their ability increases.

People should expect a swarm player at some point. I don't mean every game, but some games they are going to be there. It doesn't matter if you are playing against a relative, or long term friend, or someone you just met at a shop; expecting a swarm player reduces their ability by 50% at least. They only way a dedicated swarmer is going to win is if he finds someone that is unprepared.

There are a few ways that will help reduce the chances of encountering a swarm player twice. That is to kick the crap out of his forces the first game. Doing so really just means knowing that you likely need a solid single shot on target to cripple it while knowing that they need to have several units land several shots to do the same level of damage to one of your units. That means keeping them spaced, but within range to help each other and knowing when to stand still really means knowing how to kill the swarming units.

People that are easy to counter are those that have a single type of weapon that they rely upon. No machine guns? Bring infantry to annoy the hell out of them. No LRMs? Bring your own and indirect fire them to death. Nothing but LRMS? AMS and means to kill spotters. Learn how to set up jumping units by baiting them into a bad position.

One game I was annoyed at myself because someone had some hovers that were being pests. I was experimenting with some units I had not used before and didn't have my normal mixture of weapons to counter the hovers. If I did the hovers wouldn't have been around to be pests. My units' positions were fine to counter them, just not the right weapons.

One thing people can do is bring an anti-pest unit. Something with weapons that have modifiers to hit, such as pulse lasers, standard Acs with special munitions, targeting computers, or even a light unit held back to counter anything that tries to swarm.

Of course if you are bringing 10 times the size of a force then anyone else you might have gone to far and jumped off the cliff instead of walking the edge. It might be kind of hard to counter 50 medium lasers shooting at a single target per turn.  I would say that 2-4 times the number is fairly reasonable within the swarm tactics camp, but also far from being punched in the head(joking) for being a jerk land. I like my light mechs and infantry, not because I can swarm, but because I like infantry and light mechs. I also don't care to increase my pilots' skills, which means I have more BV points for units. I don't think my numbers have really harmed the game, especially when I have to move several units at a time.

[Col.Hengist]

Blow them selves up... You guys use the stackpole rule? If all it has is heavy lasers Theres no ammo to blow...

[YingJanshi]

Blow them selves up... You guys use the stackpole rule? If all it has is heavy lasers Theres no ammo to blow...

Hm...don't think you could intentially stackpole. Must be using boobytraps. And I agree, that's not good sportsmanship at all.

[A. Lurker]

Hm...don't think you could intentially stackpole. Must be using boobytraps. And I agree, that's not good sportsmanship at all.

You can. "Self-Destruct Sequence" rules, TacOps p. 78 -- it's exactly stackpoling on purpose. It takes a moment of time in which everybody can still maneuver, though, whereas a booby trap goes off right away and also produces a rather bigger boom.

[Rtifs]

Since we’re not talking about gaming the system…. another way of looking at it is why is one player bringing a tiny force?  I would include my own support forces, protos, battle armor, vehicles etc.  I might still be outnumbered, but I’d be able to bring some of the same advantages or rather counter some of the swarm guy’s advantages.  I guess I think it’s a two way street.  Neither player should be required to build a force to accommodate the other guy.  If you want to bring a swarm, that should be ok if the intent isn’t to game the system.  There are things the smaller forces guy could do – such as LRM-mines, inferno rounds etc. to deny avenues of approach and increase killy-ness.  I think some of the responsibility for having fun is on the small forces guy.  If I faced swarms and couldn’t handle them, I’d face the fact that my tactics are deficient and look for ways to improve.

[Taelus]

After a little reading I found out you can remote control a Savannah Master like drones. Well I
thought of something, put a command detonated mine in the SM. Drive it up to a mech and
Boom there goes a leg. Ten points of damage, at least back then. This was a table game.

All legal and easy to do except it is all most impossible to stop a SM because of the speed. The
big trouble came when I heard non-stop whining. It was unfair, why because I thought of it
before he did.

There are some things that are legal and possible to do but not worth doing it because of the
Whining you will have to suffer through.

[GreekFire]

IMO at that point you might as well just bring nukes to the table and call it a day.

[Taelus]

People are not up for a good challenge. LOL O0

[Foxx Ital]

IMO at that point you might as well just bring nukes to the table and call it a day.

I'd just counter that with a Ostrogoth loaded up with Napalm.

There are some things that are legal and possible to do but not worth doing it because of the
Whining you will have to suffer through.

There is a difference between setting up a challenge and stacking the game in a way that's essentially going to waste peoples time. If this were a campaign game and done against an opfor that would be one thing, Pick up games should potentially be fun for both sides.

[Avitue]

Note that the unit morale argument cuts both ways.

I for example play wobbies most of the time. Sending units to die in a blaze of glory like the rabid fanatical loonies they are is PERFECTLY in-character for me to do, and you can bet I'll be RPing it off while cackling maniacally. :D

[Giovanni Blasini]

People are not up for a good challenge. LOL O0

It's moments like these that I like reminding players who insist on cheering on the swarm tactics with battlearmor or Savannah Masters that BattleSats are only 1088 BV.

[TigerShark]

Trying to add RP elements isn't a solution for flawed mechanics. It's a band-aid, at best. Also, if people could RP, then Clan-IS battles wouldn't carry the heavy burden they do currently. People have enough trouble wrapping their heads around zellbrigen, let alone forcing their units to withdraw when very specific damage conditions occur. It's not only difficult to track, it ends up absorbing the majority of your attention.

In an electronic environment, it's largely tracked by the computer. On the table, you have to double-check every record sheet, every turn. That's fine for Lance battles, but anything bigger and I guarantee it will slip your mind for at least one turn. Either that, or one player won't advance in a manner which pleases the other. i.e.: "you didn't advance toward your map edge!" "yes I did!" "that's not the right map edge!" blah blah blah

RP elements are COMPLETELY arbitrary. They depend on what the player feels his/her units would do in X and Y situations. And if they're not arbitrary, or decided by role playing, you're just installing a more complex house rule to mask a bad in-game rule. Either way, it goes back to the same, core problem.

[Col.Hengist]

After a little reading I found out you can remote control a Savannah Master like drones. Well I
thought of something, put a command detonated mine in the SM. Drive it up to a mech and
Boom there goes a leg. Ten points of damage, at least back then. This was a table game.

All legal and easy to do except it is all most impossible to stop a SM because of the speed. The
big trouble came when I heard non-stop whining. It was unfair, why because I thought of it
before he did.

There are some things that are legal and possible to do but not worth doing it because of the
Whining you will have to suffer through.

Trust me, you're not the first one to think of it. Most people don't do things like that because it's no fun. It's like covering the board with infantry or BA. Sure you can do it but it leaves a bad taste in your opponents mouth and will make them not want to game with you again.
 If the game set up is for cheese tactics that's one thing but friendly games... That's not friendly, imo

[Slotus2005]

I would say just ask your opponent if they are up to fighting off a swarm. My friends and I play 8,000 point pick up games and we have the standard rule that there may be no more than 12 units. This keeps the game more or less in line, and avoids upset opponents.

I would be interested in seeing if I could fight off the swarm, with things like pulse lasers, targeting computers, and precision ammo it should not be too bad. If you were playing straight level 1 rules then things like the AC2 carrier could be helpful, or lots of small LRMs. It is very easy to motive hovercraft (once you have hit them of course). One of my friends wants to try this swarm list... I told him sure, just let me know.

[Mohammed As`Zaman Bey]

If the game set up is for cheese tactics that's one thing but friendly games... That's not friendly, imo

  Yeah, one of my players always wanted to field the 100-ton TSM/Axe weilding Atlas he custom deigned and I said, "Okay, but you can't pilot it." I gave the Atlas over to a player who couldn't manage heat to save his life. He never got the TSM to work right.
If allowed to play it, the guy would be killing a Daishi every turn...

[Col.Hengist]

Why not use a berzerker?

[Go For The Throat]

Since we’re not talking about gaming the system…. another way of looking at it is why is one player bringing a tiny force?  I would include my own support forces, protos, battle armor, vehicles etc.  I might still be outnumbered, but I’d be able to bring some of the same advantages or rather counter some of the swarm guy’s advantages.  I guess I think it’s a two way street.  Neither player should be required to build a force to accommodate the other guy.  If you want to bring a swarm, that should be ok if the intent isn’t to game the system.  There are things the smaller forces guy could do – such as LRM-mines, inferno rounds etc. to deny avenues of approach and increase killy-ness.  I think some of the responsibility for having fun is on the small forces guy.  If I faced swarms and couldn’t handle them, I’d face the fact that my tactics are deficient and look for ways to improve.

This! I could not agree more!

As a player that gravitates toward the lighter end of the weight spectrum, I hate that my preferred style of play is automatically equated to "being a jerk" even though it is nowhere near as bad as examples used in this thread. Not every swarm player is going to pull underhanded shenanigans, just like not every Clan player is a TC'd Pulse Boating munchkin, but there are fewer good apples than bad.  As a counterpoint, is it not just as reasonable that a swarm player (as long as the swarm is operated with "no intention of gaming the system") could see the person that only deploys a few Assaults/Heavies as being just as much of a "jerk", because they are not playing their way?

[Nahuris]

Yeah, that's where I run into problems --- I prefer lighter units, and rarely field much in the way of heavy or assault mechs, unless it is the rare 5/8 or 6/9 heavy, and only when I need that kind of mass when I put forces together. It's not so much of a swarm thing, in the plan, as it is a desire to not be locked into a slow slugging match on the table. I use slow lights, such as the Eagle, or Battlehawk to support those heavies.... because a heavy mech is a serious investment, and it's more effective to lose an escort, than the heavy guy. I am also a fluff player --- my Davions will have a Jagermech on the field, while just about any 3025 force will have Stingers or Wasps.... as they were common, and used in many formations.

However, that almost always leads to me outnumbering my opposition.... and the inevitable arguments over initiative, etc.....

Now, as some of the players in our group can tell you, I do have some assault mechs, and I have fielded them, but they are not a preferred style of play, but, if it fits the battle type, or game, I will do it....... in the end, though, I prefer to have maneuver, over firepower..... and that usually means I am going to be accused of swarming my opponent.

Nahuris

[YingJanshi]

So really, it just comes down to your sportsmanship. But that applies to both players...forcing your opponent to only play with a style of play that you want to play against is just as unsportsmanlike as trying to game the system for a cheap win.

There'll always be players that call anything outside their comfort zone as "unfair" and are unwilling to try to adapt or change their play style. And there's nothing really you can do other than acquiesce and play as they always demand to or stop playing with them altogether.

[CapellanBlast]

Avoid cheesy mechanics abuses, such as preventing a unit from moving by surrounding it with your swarm and just stopping because you can't pass through an enemy occupied hex.

Also, treat your swarm like they're people. A Savannah master isn't a cruise missile. Even if you have a casual disregard for their life, don't use them like they do too.

I'm having starcraft 2 flashbacks..

Anything you can do in the system that's fair and has counters is perfectly fine. Its their response that's the problem.

Treating military units like they're actually people is a cardinal sin of strategy. They're pawns and nothing more. People don't worry about pawns in chess. People also don't cry about seemingly unfair results in chess. The issue is that you don't see every possibility with battletech, whereas with chess, all the pieces are there so its plain that anything you fail to see as a strategic or tactical possibility is your own fault. Its much easier to blame someone else in games that are more complex and have hidden information, like battletech. Hidden information would be a certain type of mech or vehicle which would absolutely wrecks savannah swarm tactics.

If they're isolating their mechs and getting swarmed, they're at fault. It sucks, but you'll have to sandbag to "be sportsman-like". No one does this kind of mental gymnastics over chess. Anything you can do there is fair. They should be wanting to figure out what they can do to counter it, and craving to figure out the proper response. That they aren't suggests they really don't want to learn the game and don't have much interest in it.

[Liam's Ghost]

You misunderstand what I mean by "treat them as people". I'm not speaking in a "commander and his troops" sense. I mean in the "hey, maybe they aren't all fanatics willing to throw away their lives pointlessly for limited tangible gain". Just because you could mechanically ramp a dozen savannah masters off a hill and into your opponent doesn't mean that's something you'd expect the drivers to be enthusiastic about, ya'know? Or maybe every unit doesn't fight to the absolute bitter end, or what have you.