BattleTech - The Board Game of Armored Combat
BattleTech Game Systems => Ground Combat => Topic started by: YingJanshi on 03 May 2015, 17:35:52
-
Okay, have a question for all of you: how do you effectively use swarm type units and tactics without becoming someone that everyone refuses to play against? It is a valid tactic, especially if you are playing a militia style unit. Take the posterchild for this playstyle: the Savannah Master. It would be suicidal to use a SM against anything solo. Ideally you would want at least a lance of them taking on another target. And yet that can feel....Munchy...
So how do you use swarm tactics and units without being a Jerk?
-
Don't use Savannah masters at all. Don't use swarm tactics against them at all if there is a chance that someone may end up refusing to play against you. It is more important that you keep them playing against you and enjoying the challenge/game than it is to boost your ego for a game and then they never want to play again.
Did that with my brother once. Stomped him in one game way back in the late 80s (no swarm tactics were used) and then after that he never wanted to play Battletech against me again.
-
Can't really come off as "not a jerk" but, for the sake of the question, you're right - its a valid tactic.
Here are my suggestions:
Maps
Offer to play on mapsheets that can ill-support your troops. For the Hovercraft (your Savannah sample), rocky or wooded areas deny you as much area as your swarm-tactics can pull off. For treds/wheels, go offroad or in swampy, watery maps. If you can manage, choose the least-favorable map for your type and lower your own ego for a fight or few (not meant to be snarky, but you know your own skill, play to your weaknesses).
Fair Game
If your opponents know that you always field swarm units, offer them ways to defeat your tactics. Artillery is certainly good at doing that, as are flak-weapons to cripple/defeat vees, and pulse boats/inferno against infantry. Every tactic has a flaw; share and explore options to defeat your own forces... and then allow yourself to develop a counter-counter to their counter.
Match Themes
Offer to play games with objectives like "King of the Hill" or "Capture the Flag". This allows you to still field your own mix of Swarm while requiring you to purchase at least 1 or 2 BattleMechs (so you have a chance to win as well). You could also follow specific scenarios supplied in some of the books, or "re-enact" some famous battles from the novels/fluff. There are more to playing BattleTech than just stand-up fights.
Diversify
As a last resort, change your tactics. You know you want to play Swarm... why not let someone else play with your forces while you try out different tactics? Or help your peers design their own swarm while you develop counter-swarm tactics with your own units.
-
I think it depends on who you are playing . . . and no offense to Force, IMO the problem was the response to the game not that his brother lost.
One-off games are a bit easier to control with that sort of things as you set the terms before showing . . . 4-8 units, X BV, skills at blah-blah, mechs only/combined arms/no ASF/whatever and this sort of map. Everyone knows the terms and what will be happening. Some will take advantage of having more units, others will sink all sorts of power in a single unit- IIRC someone took a Stealth Pillager to a MO game that was most of their BV . . . and lost it early to a headshot from a gauss rifle.
Campaign, swarm might be expected and it should be dictated by the story.
-
I'm a definite advocate of Swarm tactics. I enjoy fielding larger numbers of ProtoMechs or Vehicles to restrict enemy options. Even when I only play with 'Mechs I'll go for lighter ones, using numbers and combined slashing attacks to gain the advantage. This doesn't mean that I do so willy nilly, with all of my games having half a map covered with my units.
I game with a regular group, so they all know what I enjoy playing. This lets them build around it, and if they want to try something new without getting Proto/Light-ganked then they let me know and I field something different. That way they always have at least a few of the right tools to deal with what I'm gonna field (and I usually have a small idea of what they're going for as well), ultimately giving us a funner game. For us, there's no enjoyment in being told "welp, you've got no flak so you automatically lose against this VTOL-using player" and the like. Now, I'm not saying you have to hand over a list of everything you're gonna bring, but if every player says something like "I'm bringing a lot of Protos", "I'm bringing a couple AeroFighters", "I'm bringing mostly laser-boats" then no one gets royally screwed for a no-fun game.
So I guess some transparency is important. If you're playing completely blind in a competitive environment or something, then try slightly more expensive/less numerous swarms. Make sure you buy things that should keep the overall unit ratio between players at reasonable levels, instead of doing something like fielding 90 Cecerops in an 8k game. But if you want to field twenty units against his (projected) five, then that's part of the game. These tactics are counterable, you just have to be prepared. And if they refuse to load up on the right weapons, then that's their issue. Same goes for any uncommon but potentially abusive tactic, like AeroSpace bombing, massed infantry or pulse jumpers.
-
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.
-
Well there are also a few players like me that don't care if they are facing Swarm user. That is because I know how to counter them quite well.
But from my point of view it would look better if the enemy had a more diverse swarm, so no 10 points of elementals, but '2 points x 5 BA types' of BA.
-
I have used light vehicle tactics successfully, in many games. The first thing is to realize that the more units you use, the harder it is for your opposition to deal with it. Second, that each one of those light units has a different advantage, and setting up a game that favors that advantage, where the opponent feels trapped, or railroaded, is when the tactic causes anger.
So, first mix it up a little -- one lance of Savannah Masters, or Gabriels is fine....per about 4000 to 5000 BV2. At that point, it is replacing one or two fast light mechs.... which, as long as the rest of the force is fairly balanced against the opposition, shouldn't be a major issue. Especially if there is enough terrain on the table, that it isn't all about the fast hover tanks.
I would also note to your opponent, that you do use combined arms, so that they know that the possibility is there ..... that way, they can have a few LBX armed mechs, or similar. I once had an opponent use 18 Savannah Masters, along with other units, on the table, against me --- (there was more than one person per side, but he and I had created the forces), but, as I knew that there was the possibility, I was able to field a Wolftrap, which is an awesome hover tank hunter, and an Assassin, the variant with the LBX5. It was still a hard battle, but because my side had some knowledge that we might face that, we were able to include something to deal..... so it wasn't a total kick in the seat.
Finally, spam is never good ---- in the above scenario, the planet in question, had just gotten the Savannah Masters, as a means to police shipping over some fairly large shallow inland seas.... so it made sense, and since we were attacking right after they were delivered..... their pilots were average 4/5 gunner pilots, rather than elite, but they did just happen to be together, rather than spread out in pairs in the 9 districts..... (that was how we justified them all on the field) ---- but, outside of this rare occurrence, spam is bad. It's one thing if you run into a militia with a lance of Scorpion Light tanks, a lance of Savannah Masters, and maybe a couple of other Hover tanks, plus some older tech, or sub-optimal mechs..... with a couple of better designs, to give a little spine..... or you instead run into a pair of Hellstars, supported by a battalion of Savannah Masters.
In the end, you CAN play with the swarm rules, but really, it falls under the Don't be a Dick rule....
My Comstar defenders once had 8 Gabriels, 2 Pike Support Vehicles, and 2 lances of mixed light and Medium 3025 defenders, versus an Equal BV2 mercenary company of mechs...... one of the merc lances were 3050 upgrades, while the rest were 3025.... and it was surprisingly equal ---- and everyone had a good time, while a couple of players learned respect for the Pike.
So, go ahead and do it, but keep some thought into what you do.
Nahuris
-
My swarm tactics come in the form of anything I can get from Quickscell. O:-)
-
Thanks for the responses guys. :)
I know the OP wasn't much to go on but I was in a bit of a hurry when I posted it and wasn't quite sure how to phrase it. To be honest I don't use swarm tactics. And most of the time when you hear someone using such...they usually aren't painted very nicely. Which why I asked. I don't use vees much, mostly because they always seem to want more on the table than if I do an all 'Mech force (I mean, if I do a mixed company of vees and 'Mechs, I always feel like I don't have enough vees). However some units do seem tailor made for such tactics: the Savannah Master, Gabrial, Vedette, Scorpion, Protos. So I wanted to know how to effectively use them, without trying to stomp someone abusively. In all of my games I play against players that have a very "it's all in fun" attitude. While we'll beat each other mercilessly in game, at the end it's all about having fun and not so much winning (especially since I hardly ever win ;D). We also don't play all that often, so still learning new tactics and new play styles.
-
I am partial to flatbed trucks with an LRM20 stuck on it..... I roll up, spray my missiles, and then head out.
I actually have a number of vehicles that I have designed, using GHQ miniatures, that I use as "Technicals" or planetary level garrison designs, usually with ICE engines, and designed to provide support for the local militia, and troops. I go out of my way to make sure that they are something that could reasonably be made, considering Battletech's history and what's in the novels...
However, per those same novels, there are instances where a local guy, using 6 hunting rifles, makes a "machine gun" that gets mounted on an industrial mech..... along with people building and mounting AC's, etc.... in that same novel, and a majority of the planets in Battletech have at least, an 80's tech base.... so that is fairly broad.
But the thing is, while these vehicles might be common, at least on a planet that makes them, they are going to be located at sites that need defending, not roaming the countryside looking for mechs to get in fights with. And, you are likely to have only 3 or 4 there..... as the others on planet are probably guarding whatever installation, building, phone network center, or whatever they are assigned to. However, they should not be discounted, nor should players shy away from using small light inexpensive stuff...... Players that refuse to fight "swarm tactics" are failing to understand one of the basic tenets of the game..... where, even in the books, it says that "while mechs are rare, there are no limits to the number of men that can be thrown into combat, willingly, or not"
It's a fact of the battletech universe.... and while we, as players, might prefer to field the special forces units of mechs...... warfare, in the Battletech universe, is fought with what's available..... else, why have combat knives in the equipment sections?
Nahuris
-
There is a massive difference between playing to enjoy the game and playing to win at all costs with a complete disregard of other player's enjoyment of the game. That is a balance to keep in mind. Some more selfish players will blame the opposition for not playing what they have no interest in playing, just to be able to be competitive. Some people seem to think jumping mechs with pulse lasers and TC in every unit is completely acceptable, but that is certainly not within the realm of gamer etiquette.
-
There is a massive difference between playing to enjoy the game and playing to win at all costs with a complete disregard of other player's enjoyment of the game. That is a balance to keep in mind. Some more selfish players will blame the opposition for not playing what they have no interest in playing, just to be able to be competitive. Some people seem to think jumping mechs with pulse lasers and TC in every unit is completely acceptable, but that is certainly not within the realm of gamer etiquette.
I'll admit to having a dislike to facing improved jump jets, targeting computers, and Clan pulse lasers in a single package......but, it does happen. Just as I have been on both sides of swarms. A well balanced force has a reasonable chance against this, as long as the whole battlefield is not set up to support it. If my opponent is using all Savannah Masters, and then picks terrain that is nothing but open grasslands, with strategic clumps of trees, just where he needs to do turns..... then yes, that is a bit cheesy.... not unbeatable, but definitely cheesy.... and yes, I would feel some frustration. On the other hand, we had a recent battle where the terrain was canyon style ridges, and clefts of rock fading into an area of open desert with a few dunes. The slower units were able to use the terrain to balance the high speed units, and the battle was awesome, with some great firefights happening around some of the outcroppings or clefts...... yet, one side did have a company of hover tanks, along with another company of tracked, supporting a company of medium mechs, with at least one lance of those tracked tanks being Myrmidons.This was versus 2 Companies of mostly medium to heavy mechs with some tracked support. The hover tanks got to shine, and dealing with hull down tanks, along with units that could hide behind level 1 hills and sand dunes created a very unique battle, that I thoroughly enjoyed, and that everyone who played, had nothing but praise for. And that includes the pilot of the Heavy mech that tried to storm a hill and take a pair of Myrmidons.... who promptly got swarmed by 4 of the hover tanks, along with the 2 Myrmidons...... his remark was "damn, I forgot that they hadn't moved yet.... this is probably going to hurt."
In the end, it's not the swarm that is bad --- it is the way it is used and presented. If the whole battle is set up for the swarm player to humiliate or curbstomp an opponent, then it is going to cause some frustration, if not outright anger...... and really no different than facing one opponent that I played against once stated that his unit was "pretty well balanced, at X BV2", but was instead all custom assault mechs with nothing but AC/20's SRM's and medium lasers --- but with double heat sinks..... and the battle set up, at his table, where the play area was slightly less than 2 map sheets of usable terrain, with terrain designed to force all fighting at ranges of 4 or less.
The best thing that I can advise players is to talk it out first...... make sure that your opposition knows that you are considering a unit designed along those lines. And share the choice of terrain..... so that it is fair to both, or all of, the players.
Nahuris
-
I would have to say that it depends on your definition of "swarm". A lance is NOT a swarm. A company may be a swarm, depending on what it is, how it's used, and what it's facing. A battalion of something IS a swarm, no question.
If you're each typically fielding 12 or more units per side, and you up that to 24 "lighter" ones, then that's probably within reason, provided that you don't pull stunts like surrounding the opponent to deny movement. If one guy's fielding a lance, and expects that you'll field the same, but you show up with 24 Savannah Masters and/or Gabriels instead, that's a swarm. If he's aware that you may do that, doesn't question or complain about it in advance, and still chooses to field 4 'Mechs, then it's a swarm, but that's his problem. I still wouldn't do that under "normal" circumstances, but an abnormal game can be fun once in a while, if everyone knows in advance that anything goes in that particular game. One guy shows up with gobs of off-board artillery and a lone VTOL spotter, another shows up with 200 platoons of infantry, yet another shows up with 50 light hovers, and the last guy fields nothing but aerospace fighters, and then you all have to laugh at how ridiculous and unplayable it is before you break out the standard 'Mech record sheets again.
-
I have to disagree with one thing the OP said. The Savannah master is definatly a match for a mech... A locust. O:-)
Swarm tactics have been used on me ( you posted on here, you know who you are :D ) . it's a very effective tactic. People say I do it too but I disagree with that assessment. I enjoy combined arms. Lately in my games I will use 4-6 platoons of infantry with carriers, fast hovers, mbt's and, being a Lyran Social General, at least one lance of assault mechs. This is a 15k bv2 force.
I can definatly swarm with this force. Here's what I say if people say that I'm swarming, I enjoy combined arms. It's not really my fault if they don't. Maybe the people you game with should step up their game. A big combined arms game with artillery and Asf can be so much fun.
-
Just because people don't enjoy playing the game the same way you do doesn't mean they need to change. Some people just don't like running too many units at one time. Trying to force them to is just going to wind up causing frustration.
-
I have to disagree with one thing the OP said. The Savannah master is definatly a match for a mech... A locust. O:-)
Swarm tactics have been used on me ( you posted on here, you know who you are :D ) . it's a very effective tactic. People say I do it too but I disagree with that assessment. I enjoy combined arms. Lately in my games I will use 4-6 platoons of infantry with carriers, fast hovers, mbt's and, being a Lyran Social General, at least one lance of assault mechs. This is a 15k bv2 force.
I can definatly swarm with this force. Here's what I say if people say that I'm swarming, I enjoy combined arms. It's not really my fault if they don't. Maybe the people you game with should step up their game. A big combined arms game with artillery and Asf can be so much fun.
Yes, I have used swarm tactics on you.....LOL. Then again, you like to play the Lyran Stereotypical Social General, and I am not into assault slug fests..... meaning I will probably outnumber you every time we go that particular route........
At the same time, though, I have always given fair warning, and let you know what I had planned. Which is why it ended up being fun, because there is using quantity over quality play.... and using huge numbers with the intent of manipulating the rule system, for a victory. I have no problem with proto mechs --- and Col Hengist has promised me a fight with them... but while I know he will use them well, I also know that I won't be put in a place where he uses so many, that I lose the ability to move all of my units.
Now, he probably could pull that one off..... and our games can get fairly competitive.... but we also respect each other enough to not go out of our way to Cheese a victory..... if we are going to win, we are going to earn it, and respect each other afterwards. And I think that is the real difference... those of us that respect the game, and our opponents will use those tactics, but, we abide by the "Don't be a Dick" rule.......those people that use these tactics with the intent of just winning, or more often, totally curbstomping their opponent, really don't gain much from it...... so, you won by a technicality in the rules...... at our table, we had the same tactics, or play.... but we had a great time, no one left angry, and the winners congratulated the other side for their well played forces. The game should be played for fun --- not to prove some imagined superiority, and regardless of tactics used, it is easy to tell when you are playing one type, or the other.
So, for the OP -- go ahead, build the force that you want, and play it, but keep the principles of fun play on the table, and expect that your opponent might surprise you in turn.
Nahuris
-
Swarm tactics particularly with Savannah Masters tend to only work in tandem with other units . I can believe a lance of Assault Mechs and 3 lances of Savannah Masters fighting together . Just Savannah Masters would be suicide as the enemy would only have hit equals kill targets and it would take forever to finish the fight . It would be moral destroying . The enemy must have a higher priority target available to them otherwise the inherent loss of life is too high and invites mutiny and desertion.The scenario becomes less believable.
-
My regular and I made it simple; Both sides must always have the same number of units at the start of combat. If he feels flooding the field with light units is acceptable, it is perfectly acceptable for me to respond in typical Steiner fashion; Have a literal 'Wall of Steel'. Just... With Zeuses and Atlases flooding my side of the court. Considering our unit count is always between 8v8 and 12v12, this has nasty results.
So basically, we have an honor rule in effect on this.
EDIT: Come to think of it, I didn't answer the question in the slightest, and just mentioned how I kept it from happening.
I guess I'd have to say that it depends on the demeanor of your opponent and their unit list. I would not recommend using swarm tactics on people with anger issues, or are just getting started. But in any case, it's hard to use swarm tactics without being 'unrealistic' or being a jerk. To the point of where I have trouble seeing where you can do it within a tolerable capacity.
-
The best thing that I can advise players is to talk it out first...... make sure that your opposition knows that you are considering a unit designed along those lines. And share the choice of terrain..... so that it is fair to both, or all of, the players.
Nahuris
Which is why when i do pick up games, i prefer BOTH (or all if more than 2 players are going to be there) agree before hand on what terrain is in play, rules sets etc if at all possible.
-
Fix the init system and all of this goes away. There's no more debate to be had. We have endless debates about swarms, cheese this, tactics that, when most of the problem is in the rules. They haven't been revised in years and it seems to be time for a revision.
We've been using Front-Loaded Initiative in MegaMek for years and it's a far more viable system than what's in TW currently. I don't see a reason to use anything else, IMO. It would be nice to have that as a formal rule in IO or added in the newest eduction of TacOps. The idea of "swarms" vaporizes into thin air.
The way I see it, it's like putting a bunch of traffic cones on a walkway, blocking every path but a small, thin lane. People will struggle to line up, jam into a single line and waddle forward, griping about traffic. In reality, you can just move the cones and people are free to go.
Language
The reality is that the TW rule can be errata'ed to fix the problem. When calculating the number of units being moved by the larger side, it rounds down. Instead, round up. Problem is fixed.
Example:
Side A has 4 units.
Side B has 11 units.
TURN 1 (Current)
Side A moves 1 [3 remaining]
Side B moves 2 [9 remaining]
(11/4 = 2.75, rounded down = 2)
TURN 1 (Proposed)
Side A moves 1 [3 remaining]
Side B moves 3 [8 remaining]
(11/4 = 2.75, rounded up = 3)
TURN 2 (Current)
Side A moves 1 [2 remaining]
Side B moves 3 [6 remaining]
TURN 2 (Proposed)
Side A moves 1 [2 remaining]
Side B moves 3 [5 remaining]
TURN 3 (Current)
Side A moves 1 [1 remaining]
Side B moves 3 [3 remaining]
TURN 3 (Proposed)
Side A moves 1 [1 remaining]
Side B moves 3 [2 remaining]
Huge difference on the table, where you remove the initial swarm advantage and lessen its effect throughout the game and for a very simple fix.
-
I've run games without initiative --- using the same rules that are in Full Thrust, where people note down their movement, secret from everyone else, and then everyone moves at once.......it makes for faster games, where people don't agonize while counting hexes over and over, before moving, and it also kills the if I win, I attack, and if I lose I run/jump away so that no fire happens, and we waste that turn, and the next, getting back to the battle... but only if I win that die roll, or it just keeps on...........
Nahuris
-
Frontloading does help with initiative things a bit, especially if you've got a player who tends to abuse initiative sinks. But it isn't the be-all, end-all way to fix lighter swarms. Certain abusable tactics - such as cheap ProtoMech swarms - can actually be assisted through the use of frontloading.
I will however agree that if your gaming group is up for it, it's a nice alternative to the standard initiative rules.
-
Frontloading does help with initiative things a bit, especially if you've got a player who tends to abuse initiative sinks. But it isn't the be-all, end-all way to fix lighter swarms. Certain abusable tactics - such as cheap ProtoMech swarms - can actually be assisted through the use of frontloading.
I will however agree that if your gaming group is up for it, it's a nice alternative to the standard initiative rules.
I've never run ProtoMechs as separate, initiative-bearing units. 5 = 1 unit, for my games. I can't imagine 25 of them vs. 5. That's silly.
-
I've run games without initiative --- using the same rules that are in Full Thrust, where people note down their movement, secret from everyone else, and then everyone moves at once.......it makes for faster games, where people don't agonize while counting hexes over and over, before moving, and it also kills the if I win, I attack, and if I lose I run/jump away so that no fire happens, and we waste that turn, and the next, getting back to the battle... but only if I win that die roll, or it just keeps on...........
Nahuris
Its an interesting system, except it gets rid of intentional charges and DFAs....
-
I've never run ProtoMechs as separate, initiative-bearing units. 5 = 1 unit, for my games. I can't imagine 25 of them vs. 5. That's silly.
I don't either. What I'm saying is if you frontload, you can move a total of 15 ProtoMechs instead of 10 on one of those initial turns, which can help with certain movement-limiting tactics.
-
I don't either. What I'm saying is if you frontload, you can move a total of 15 ProtoMechs instead of 10 on one of those initial turns, which can help with certain movement-limiting tactics.
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Those little buggers are either complete toast (Siren) or they're a nightmare (Boggart). Not much in-between on Protos.
-
Its an interesting system, except it gets rid of intentional charges and DFAs....
If you predict where your opponent is going, then no... also, if you declare a charge, or DFA, in the rules, it is assumed you focused and went for that opponent, so you show that you declared it, and you then move after that target, either being able to reach it, or getting as close as you can.
It also changes the whole I lost initiative, so I am going to just move and then shoot, when your plan was a DFA ----
Nahuris
-
I am surprised the thread has made it this far without somebody bringing up the Force Size Modifier option out of TM. Or perhaps that was on purpose, because of how absolutely atrocious it is...
My current group deals with swarms by making them (Lances of SM's, Points of Proto's, etc...) count as one unit for initiative purposes.
Even just straight-up, I do not have a problem with swarms. Provided it is, as previously mentioned, not terrain biased in the favor of the swarm, used against new players, or the classic Company of SM's to immobilize units with a Lance of Assaults to pick them apart.
-
I am surprised the thread has made it this far without somebody bringing up the Force Size Modifier option out of TM. Or perhaps that was on purpose, because of how absolutely atrocious it is...
Good news! It wasn't mentioned because it's gone. Some not-so-recent errata pulled it out of TM completely. [rockon]
If you want to field a swarm without completely altering the game, try taking a swarm of something that's challenging just to keep alive. Take a swarm of WiGEs, and all it will take are a few bad sideslip rolls for your opponent to be having as much fun as you are watching your forces careen all over the map just trying to get form point A to point B, much less actually fighting. ;D
-
See, I detest front-loading as IMO it encourages mech only forces and pushes to assault turret wars. As I will run lighter but more numerous forces that allows you to move a single assault for advantage when I might move two medium tanks. It makes a mockery of winning initiative with the more numerous force.
You brought concentrated firepower with that gaggle of assaults, I brought distributed firepower for manuever . . . which does not matter as much when I must move say two-thirds of my force by the time you only move half.
-
See, I detest front-loading as IMO it encourages mech only forces and pushes to assault turret wars. As I will run lighter but more numerous forces that allows you to move a single assault for advantage when I might move two medium tanks. It makes a mockery of winning initiative with the more numerous force.
You brought concentrated firepower with that gaggle of assaults, I brought distributed firepower for manuever . . . which does not matter as much when I must move say two-thirds of my force by the time you only move half.
You wouldn't and don't move 2/3 to their 1/2. Or, if you've seen that, could you post how that would work? I did the math above and it's pretty much impossible.
At this point in the game, the Clans are unplayable against the Inner Sphere. You could field 16 IS units to their (Clan) 5 and completely mob one unit per turn. The game turns into "walk backward and keep range while IS runs forward to kick. Rinse. Repeat."
The solutions to this usually revolve around 'don't be a jerk' or 'make sure your opponent has fun' or other such memes. The IS player becomes responsible for his opponent's fun by dumbing down their force to compensate for a bad initiative system. It really shouldn't be that way. If there's another, better way, beyond Front Load or the Round Up method described above, I'm all ears. But sticking with the current system is just leading to an endless debate and aversion to Clan - IS games.
-
I am surprised the thread has made it this far without somebody bringing up the Force Size Modifier option out of TM. Or perhaps that was on purpose, because of how absolutely atrocious it is...
FSM was the biggest mistake of a rule to ever come out of a BattleTech book. Gawd it was broken, and in a terrible "what the hell am I looking at" sort of way.
-
Good news! It wasn't mentioned because it's gone. Some not-so-recent errata pulled it out of TM completely. [rockon]
I am filled with the desire to name my first child after the absolutely wonderful person responsible for the removal of FSM. Seriously. Tell me who it was, they are my hero!
See, I detest front-loading as IMO it encourages mech only forces and pushes to assault turret wars. As I will run lighter but more numerous forces that allows you to move a single assault for advantage when I might move two medium tanks. It makes a mockery of winning initiative with the more numerous force.
You brought concentrated firepower with that gaggle of assaults, I brought distributed firepower for manuever . . . which does not matter as much when I must move say two-thirds of my force by the time you only move half.
How does front-loading encourage 'Mech-only AssaultTech? People that play that way are going to do it no matter what, at least in my experience. Sometimes you will not be able to do what you want with a unit. Whether it is because you lost initiative and have to move it first, won but your opponent moved to where you wanted to go, or your opponent moved in a completely unexpected way. Having to move a larger percentage of your force when it is your turn just goes hand-in-hand with the choice to put more units on the field. All you can do is attempt to make the best of the situation, and try to set yourself up for the next turn.
FSM was the biggest mistake of a rule to ever come out of a BattleTech book. Gawd it was broken, and in a terrible "what the hell am I looking at" sort of way.
In complete agreement! FSM has the distinction of being the only rule that would make me not want to play if it was being used. I would be willing to bet a rather sizable sum of money that either a Lyran (wall of Assaults), or Clanner came up with it.
-
FSM what did it do/Why was it broken? I remember way back there was a rule (BMR I think, not quoting) that said mechs go one at a time but that conventional forces one platoon at a time to go with how they needed to coordinate more (or something like that).
-
FSM what did it do/Why was it broken?
Basically, FSM is an equation that penalizes a player when they take a numerically larger force than their opponent. It inflated the total BV of the larger force, simply because they had more units on the field than the other player.
-
For me, the initiative system has always been problematic, as it stands, anyways. In many ways, it forces people to play with heavier units, as lighter faster units, because light fast units end up being a game of chase the initiative loser. In the majority of games I have played.... which is somewhere in the thousands .... people with light units rush in when they win initiative to get that back shot, flank shot.....etc.... but when they lose, they run, or jump so as to make sure that their opponent can't. That means that their entire tactic with that fast unit has nothing to do with the battlefield, but instead, is all about maximizing / minimizing the effect of a random die roll. And before people argue about it ---- there are people who have posted here that they use fast units this way, where losing initiative means jumping away into cover, or getting away from the opponent to avoid combat without the advantage of position, from initiative. This also means that due to the vagaries of random die rolls, it is possible for one side to lose more rounds of initiative, than they win...... and each round of lost initiative, pretty much, destroys the chance of winning......
In recent games, I am seeing more and more people putting out Mobile Command Centers.... for the initiative bonus. Not as an objective, etc...., but strictly to control the initiative roll. With games starting by adding up bonuses until you find out who actually has a bonus, and the true game part of it, seeing who was willing to gamble the most BV2 for said bonus.
No other die roll affects the outcome of play, more than initiative --- and it has MORE of an effect on the table than any other rule, or unit, and it is totally random. It can be affected by units that a player brings to the table, but in the end, you are using a totally random die roll to decide tactics and movement.
When you add in the fact that 75% of players really don't have any tactics in mind, other than seeing what the initiative roll is, and then reacting from there ..... you get one of the reasons our games are so very slow and dragged out. Another example, in our of our games, we had a player lose initiative, and be forced to move a light mech, however, anywhere he moved, he would end up being backshot, so instead, he moved one forward, turned one right, and then one forward, and then one right.... for his full movement, ending one hex behind where he started, but having passed through 5 hexes for a mod of +3, and still facing his opponents, so, no back shot........ which resulted in a 40 minute discussion over whether it was the overall number of hexes from your starting hex, that you moved, or the number of hexes you passed through, or into, that denoted the movement modifier..... as one player argued that this was little more than spinning in place, while others noted that he did move through 5 hexes of terrain. And that whole argument really goes back to the initiative roll.
Initiative is also the reason that players will keep totally devastated units on the field, to use as initiative sinks..... or do everything they can to avoid following forced withdrawal, to get as much initiative sink as possible..... my locust may only have one arm, and no weapons, but by god, it can wiggle, and until you finish it off, I can count it in the initiative, as an initiative sink.
I think that any discussion of tactics, of any type, needs to start with how much of the game is affected by the initiative roll, and then look at ways to implement tactics.
Nahuris
-
to sum up the various discussions so far..
how to use swarm tactics without being jerk.
1 ) keep the swarms small. a lance or two of swarming units will usually be ok if mixed in with a number of larger units as well.
2 ) try not to out number the enemy by too much, to avoid issues with init.
3 ) use tactics that are smart, but not trollish.
4 ) tell your opponent your going to be bringing a swarm. this lets him adjust his own force to counter.
5 ) allow your opponent to help select the terrain. make sure the terrain isn't too friendly to the swarming units.
-
I like inniative. It represents the chaos if battle. What would be the alternative?
-
I like inniative. It represents the chaos if battle. What would be the alternative?
I already posted one alternative, and I have used it, and it works. There is also individual initiative, where each player rolls their own initiative, and you move in ascending order ... 2's first, than 3, and so on ---- that tends to make players focus on helping each other out more, as people on the same side HAVE to work together ---- but yeah, there are alternatives.
Nahuris
-
I already posted one alternative, and I have used it, and it works. There is also individual initiative, where each player rolls their own initiative, and you move in ascending order ... 2's first, than 3, and so on ---- that tends to make players focus on helping each other out more, as people on the same side HAVE to work together ---- but yeah, there are alternatives.
Nahuris
Doesn't really solve the issue of swarms, however. (Sim. Movement)
- Faster units can calculate how far a Heavy-Assault formation can move and just take advantage. The Heavies are helpless to do anything but derp around, circle the wagons and wait for their opponent to get within range.
- How would you plan to move within range brackets i.e.: keep your opponent at Medium with your Gauss Rifle while he's at Long with his PPC)? Would be very difficult to utilize long-range weaponry with minimum ranges unless, by happenstance, your target happened to meander out of the zone.
- How do you resolve displacement? i.e.: both sides planning movement in the same hex. One side would need "priority" at some point.
Seems to favor the swarms more than mitigate their effect. Also seems extremely chaotic and less strategic.
-
Displacement was based on piloting with margin of success or failure --- and early on, people learned that letting bigger people get close tended to mean you got kicked. Really, it is no different than playing on a computer, either in first person, or similar to Mech Commander
Once players get used to it, there are some strong advantages, as players focus more on their plans, than they do trying to find the best place to get a back shot, without getting back shot in return....
You learn to predict your movement a turn or two ahead, and work with the flow of the battle, rather than just trying to maximize your advantage over one turn. Fast units still can roam, and you can still box them in, as they have to consider ranges and arcs to places you might be. But most units really don't move all that far in a game --- yes, Jumping is very fluid, but most mechs walk or run --- and you can look at the terrain and plan from that. It's no longer about hoping for the lucky die roll to give you an advantage, as it is about using the terrain and movement to improve your position, while still moving the plan forward.
Just as a real mechwarrior doesn't have time to deliberate where he/she is going to move during a battle.... you remove that from the table --- it becomes more of moving for an advantageous position, over moving in reaction to someone else, based on a die. It also deals with the swarm game, because of the way that initiative works, I can actually use things like Savannah Masters on my movement, having lost initiative, to pin your mech in place to get shots at zero movement mod ---- where as without that, all movement, like all fire, is simultaneous --- so even if I surround the hex, you were considered moving while I was closing, so were not pinned. Now, you do have to consider things like physicals, charges - or DFA.... and for that, you declare it during the movement, and then during movement, when everyone reveals their noted movement, you move that particular mech after the target, by the most direct route. And if you don't reach, then it is no different than if they had moved away during the normal movement --- plus, unlike actual combat, you are not standing there waiting to see what the other guy is going to do, so that you can then plan what you are going to do, changing the plan, if you realize that what you had already planned would not work. Face it, in real combat, you would not have time to wait and see if the other person is going to be where you want him to be, not in 10 seconds with simultaneous movement. If battles went the way we play them, then it would be more arguing over the radio, than actual shooting ---
Nahuris
-
I have seen a card style initiative where if your color card comes up you move a unit. It looks interesting to try.
-
One thing that I've done is to assign unit clusters for initiative purposes.
For example, if I've got a game consisting of the following forces:
Wolfhound
Spider
Centurion
Hatchetman
Marauder
Zeus
vs
Uller
Black Hawk
Ryoken
Vulture
Thor
I'd have two of the IS mechs (probably the Wolfhound and Spider, since they're the fastest) to the same initiative slot- for initiative purposes they count as one unit and must be moved together. For small groups, it works better than frontloading or rearloading init.
-
I already posted one alternative, and I have used it, and it works. There is also individual initiative, where each player rolls their own initiative, and you move in ascending order ... 2's first, than 3, and so on ---- that tends to make players focus on helping each other out more, as people on the same side HAVE to work together ---- but yeah, there are alternatives.
Nahuris
We do that in our games already.
-
As far as validity, yes swarm tactics are permitted but I consider them as extreme and unrealistic. I usually cap numbers of one unit type as huge numbers of a single unit type are highly unlikely and cheesy. When a player refuses to fight such a force, I have no problem with it.
I have players in my group who love to experiment with extremes of cheese and sometimes the fights are hilarious but in serious scenarios, I discourage the practice.
-
We do that in our games already.
Actually, what we have been doing is creating a fixed rotation for each side, and then rolling initiative for the side, and alternating, with each side moving in the same order ---- this is every player rolling his own personal initiative for his units, each turn ---- I have also seen it where people roll initiative for each mech, with vehicles in pairs --- or singly, depending on numbers.... basically rolling a set of dice and placing one on each sheet, and then having the units move, based on the individual number that they get.
One other way that I have seen is to put a Viking Rune on the top of each mech or unit sheet, and then pull the runestones out of a bag, and move in the order that they are drawn .....
Done correctly, any of these methods can work, and are no slower than any other...... and altering the initiative can really help with swarms. Another method that I have used is allowing a unit with higher initiative to pass through a hex occupied by an opponent unit, since all movement is simultaneous, and that unit, by winning initiative would have been in motion at the same time the units surrounding it were --- and so, their failed initiative means that they just didn't manage to block the unit, before it left.
The biggest issue with Swarm style play is that even when a side loses initiative, they can use their speed, and a technicality in the rules, to surround the unit that beat them in initiative, and deny it movement, and target mods, for a round.
Nahuris
-
Swarm tactics aren't extreme or unrealistic. They're the basis of Clan vs. IS play. They describe the Periphery campaign in both Reunification Wars, with militias and infantry swarming SLDF units with unconventional weapons. Heck, one scenario called the Scorpions' nest is a testbed against new 'Mechs, where they face off against a company of Scorpion Light Tanks. If anything, a single Lance being deployed to take an entire planet is less realistic than deploying a full, combined-arms force or 12 Locusts.
I feel players should be able to use any units they want and still play a fair game against their opponent. Having to construct a carefully-tailored or dumbed-down army so that your opponent doesn't get beaten up shouldn't be a core part of the game. And right now, it is.
-
Everyone seems to be so terrified to sacrifice any of their pieces. You will lose units, that is how combat works. You have to know how to advance and at the same time deter your opponent from trying to break your line. initiative, when won or lost can be used against the opponent. Area denial, surprise moves, flanking maneuvers etc. Etc.
this does not change my perspective I previously stated against swarming.
-
I think we are getting two different definitions of swarming . . .
One is outnumbering the foe- by what, maybe at least 25% more units?
Another is using many of a specific unit to outnumber the foe though perhaps with a couple of other units- as an example two companies of Savannah Masters supporting a lance of fire support mechs against two lances of mechs . . . and on a open field to boot.
-
The first time I ever dealt with swarms was about 1995, or so,.... I was asked to play some Clan mechs against an IS opponent. So, I put together 2 Stars of Clan Omnis, as I was told the guy liked to field a company of mechs, with 180 tons of vehicle support. We were sort of balanced by tonnage, and fair play, as BV was in it's infancy, and that was what we had --- so, per the accepted wisdom, I gave my opponent a 35% tonnage bonus... building a Clan force at 65% of the tonnage or my Inner Sphere opponent. One Star was commanded by a Daishi, and the other, by a Mad Cat ---- the rest were a mix with a Loki, a Vulture, a Ryoken, a Dragonfly, a Nova, a Puma, an Uller, and a Koshi.
I showed up at the table, and found that the 180 tons of vehicles was 36 Savannah Masters ---
Now, I had agreed to the game, so I made the best of it, and for the first couple of turns, we closed using hills and trees as cover, and then on turn 3, we were close enough that he was able to rush 6 of his Savannah Masters out and surround my Daishi --- which hadn't moved yet, because I had won initiative that round --- and during the fire phase I killed 4 of them, but took the combined fire of the 8 mechs he got in range, on that Daishi ---- breaking Zell, but also having to deal with that level of combined fire
Next round, I lost initiative, and insisted on moving the Daishi first, to get to a low hill, where I could fire ---- at which point, because he had to move more than one unit to keep initiative fair, 6 Savannah Masters raced out, and surrounded the Mad Cat... which died during the fire phase, due to combined fire from 9 mechs, while the Daishi was crippled by the 3 remaining mechs due to having been so heavily punished the first turn of fire.... it was to die the next round to a third and fourth engine crit when I took an ammo crit in a side torso... already having one in the center, and one in the other torso. Meanwhile, my surrounded Vulture died that round. At this point, I was combining fire, and had taken down an Awesome, and a Trebuchet..... but realized that I was now having to choose whether to try and kill the Savannah Masters, or target mechs, and that regardless of what I did, it was now a battle of attrition, that no Clan unit can win.......
The thing is, losing initiative makes this tactic even more effective ---- my opponent even crowed when he would lose initiative, because he got to "stick one of my mechs, before I could even move" ----
That is the swarm tactic that people are against, and that many people here are talking about, and why initiative is a part of the issue. This tactic, if the terrain is good, and supports it, allows someone to use LOSING initiative as an advantage, while winning initiative only lets an opponent have one move, before it gets used, anyways. The thing is, this isn't a tactic --- it's using the initiative system, and a technicality of the rules, to metagame a victory over an opponent.
And while I joined the extensive list of players that refused to play him ever again..... that doesn't solve the issue, as it only pushes people like him to get their fix by beating new players, and making them turn against the game.... or, if he can't find opponents, he would show and either keep interrupting other players, or going on and on about how he OWNED you, and how afraid you were of his troops, shown by the fact that you wouldn't play him again. This lasted almost a year, before we got enough complaints together to get him banned from the store.... which I rather actually prefer, as I have seen too many stores willing to ban someone off of just a few complaints..... which may or may not be true.
The thing is, though, that this is a LEGAL play style in the game, that voids the whole game in favor of exploitation of some of the rules to create a means by which someone can get a victory, regardless of hard feelings. It's like playing a computer game, and fighting all the way to the end, only find that the code was written so that you get a message "Welcome to the end, we didn't expect anyone to make it, and you lose because we never planned on anyone winning, the goal was for you to keep pumping quarters, instead"
That is what I would like to find a way to fix.
Nahuris
-
For me, the initiative system has always been problematic, as it stands, anyways. In many ways, it forces people to play with heavier units, as lighter faster units, because light fast units end up being a game of chase the initiative loser. In the majority of games I have played.... which is somewhere in the thousands .... people with light units rush in when they win initiative to get that back shot, flank shot.....etc.... but when they lose, they run, or jump so as to make sure that their opponent can't. That means that their entire tactic with that fast unit has nothing to do with the battlefield, but instead, is all about maximizing / minimizing the effect of a random die roll. And before people argue about it ---- there are people who have posted here that they use fast units this way, where losing initiative means jumping away into cover, or getting away from the opponent to avoid combat without the advantage of position, from initiative. This also means that due to the vagaries of random die rolls, it is possible for one side to lose more rounds of initiative, than they win...... and each round of lost initiative, pretty much, destroys the chance of winning......
While I understand where you are coming from, I have to ask what you expect the Fast Light player to do? Having been on both sides of the issue I understand how frustrating it can be, but I am not going to keep a Light 'Mech out in the open in front of a Heavy/Assault 'Mech, and I think you would be hard pressed to find somebody that would.
to sum up the various discussions so far..
how to use swarm tactics without being jerk.
1 ) keep the swarms small. a lance or two of swarming units will usually be ok if mixed in with a number of larger units as well.
2 ) try not to out number the enemy by too much, to avoid issues with init.
3 ) use tactics that are smart, but not trollish.
4 ) tell your opponent your going to be bringing a swarm. this lets him adjust his own force to counter.
5 ) allow your opponent to help select the terrain. make sure the terrain isn't too friendly to the swarming units.
1) That seems to be counter-intuitive, as the whole point of a swarm is to overwhelm your opponent with numbers. Though admittedly, numbers do need to be kept in check so they do not slow down the speed of play.
2) See response #1. There should never be issues with initiative regardless of numbers, unless it is the first time you are playing with the person/group, as there should already be something in place.
3) While there are definitely certain tactics with swarms that are unquestionably "troll", the difference can be hard to nail-down, and more often than not, even "legitimate" tactics will be considered "troll" by most players.
4) Why? It is not my fault if my opponent chose to take all anti-'Mech/Vehicle load-outs with their units when I am bringing lots of Infantry to the battle, nor is it my responsibility to inform them of their mistake.
5) No objections here, the terrain should remain as impartial as possible.
Swarm tactics aren't extreme or unrealistic. They're the basis of Clan vs. IS play. They describe the Periphery campaign in both Reunification Wars, with militias and infantry swarming SLDF units with unconventional weapons. Heck, one scenario called the Scorpions' nest is a testbed against new 'Mechs, where they face off against a company of Scorpion Light Tanks. If anything, a single Lance being deployed to take an entire planet is less realistic than deploying a full, combined-arms force or 12 Locusts.
I feel players should be able to use any units they want and still play a fair game against their opponent. Having to construct a carefully-tailored or dumbed-down army so that your opponent doesn't get beaten up shouldn't be a core part of the game. And right now, it is.
Everyone seems to be so terrified to sacrifice any of their pieces. You will lose units, that is how combat works. You have to know how to advance and at the same time deter your opponent from trying to break your line. initiative, when won or lost can be used against the opponent. Area denial, surprise moves, flanking maneuvers etc. Etc.
this does not change my perspective I previously stated against swarming.
This, on both accounts!
-
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
-
1) That seems to be counter-intuitive, as the whole point of a swarm is to overwhelm your opponent with numbers. Though admittedly, numbers do need to be kept in check so they do not slow down the speed of play.
3) While there are definitely certain tactics with swarms that are unquestionably "troll", the difference can be hard to nail-down, and more often than not, even "legitimate" tactics will be considered "troll" by most players.
4) Why? It is not my fault if my opponent chose to take all anti-'Mech/Vehicle load-outs with their units when I am bringing lots of Infantry to the battle, nor is it my responsibility to inform them of their mistake.
I'm guessing his post was an extension of the OP, so "how do you effectively use swarm type units and tactics without becoming someone that everyone refuses to play against?" Yeah, you can field swarms without letting the other player know. You can also field massed cheap artillery with superfast spotters, or jumping pulseboats, or VTOL/aerospace bombers...but at the end of the day it might leave a sour taste in the mouths of certain players.
If your gaming group is completely OK with everyone bringing blind forces and duking it out no matter what happens, that's great! But I'm sure I'm not the only one with a only group where every player is equipped with at least has a few of the right tools for the job. It helps make everyone feel like they have (or had) a chance no matter what goes down, and in our experience makes for funner games.
-
One of the things that I see with the Swarm Tactic is that it does not fit well with the fluff. For example when Justin Allard was fighting Gray Noton, they did not believe that he was fighting a rifleman as it should have made short work of him, also if I remember from the book Justin was worried that if he was not able to delay it and keep his training company away that one heavy mech could take out the company. Now the company was mostly Stingers, with a single Spider if I remember correctly. But on the game board ten or so stingers would own one rifleman, even if the rifleman was 0/0 and the stingers were 5/6. There is also the fluff about the Kurita commander who was preaching the swarm tactic of the light mech, tried it and got tore up by the medium/heavy of the Davion. A second thing that I have seen is some of the time people who play the Swarm Tactic use the cheaper BV units and then bump up there skill to a level that you would not expect to find "in real life" so I have a +3 or 4 for you to hit me with your 3/4 pilot and yet also have most of my crew at 1/2 skill.
-
For a company of 5/6 Stingers to win against Legend Killer (even if it was a standard Rifleman and not a Rifleman II with the Lostech weapons and double heatsinks removed), they'd need to resort to suicidal tactics that no training company could ever do without someone fanatical driving them.
-
For a company of 5/6 Stingers to win against Legend Killer (even if it was a standard Rifleman and not a Rifleman II with the Lostech weapons and double heatsinks removed), they'd need to resort to suicidal tactics that no training company could ever do without someone fanatical driving them.
And yet when I have tried it on MegaMek, they win every time.
-
I already posted one alternative, and I have used it, and it works. There is also individual initiative, where each player rolls their own initiative, and you move in ascending order ... 2's first, than 3, and so on ---- that tends to make players focus on helping each other out more, as people on the same side HAVE to work together ---- but yeah, there are alternatives.
Nahuris
Individual initiative works just fine, particularly if you have a GM of Ref for the game keeping track of the init. This way no one knows who's going next until they do (OK, except the GM or REF that is).
- Shane
-
And yet when I have tried it on MegaMek, they win every time.
I don't think he's talking about the odds of winning on the tabletop so much as the in-universe problems surrounding throwing a bunch of super-green trainies against an experienced Rifleman Pilot. Expecting them to coordinate well and hold the line after Stinger number one gets torn apart by the overwhelming firepower of the Rifleman (at least, in the eyes of the new pilot) might be a bit much.
It's like a scenario with one person with a gun versus five unarmed people. Sure, the unarmed individuals could take down the gunman if they coordinate and rush him, but chances are at least one of them is going to get shot. And few untrained people would be willing to try those odds.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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?
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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".
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
Blow them selves up... You guys use the stackpole rule? If all it has is heavy lasers Theres no ammo to blow...
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
IMO at that point you might as well just bring nukes to the table and call it a day.
-
People are not up for a good challenge. LOL O0
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
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...
-
Why not use a berzerker?
-
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?
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
Yeah, in the end no matter how stupid the commander is about the lives of his/her men it is ultimately the decision of the trooper on if they want to suicide themselves off a cliff (or ramming a mech at full speed).
But.. if your opponent is dumb enough to have a solo mech in the open they might deserve a swarm. Best to stay close to your buddies for covering fire. That or just use mechs with JJ all the time. Can't get stuck if you can just jump over those pests. Swarm missiles are also handy for this type game if in the right era for em (and a buddy in short/medium range).
-
In recent games, I am seeing more and more people putting out Mobile Command Centers.... for the initiative bonus. Not as an objective, etc...., but strictly to control the initiative roll.
That actually sounds pretty cool. Some supplementary object (fluff: which improves your ability to co-ordinate on the field), thus granting initiative bonus. Would be interesting to see it provide a strict initiative bonus, which is then lost if it gets blown up.
-
That actually sounds pretty cool. Some supplementary object (fluff: which improves your ability to co-ordinate on the field), thus granting initiative bonus. Would be interesting to see it provide a strict initiative bonus, which is then lost if it gets blown up.
That's how it works, it provides the bonus, until it dies --- as a Capellan player, judging by your name, you should check out the article on the Swift Wind Scout Car --- it can also provide a +1 initiative, for it's side.
Now, this is a TacOps rule, but one that can be considered.
Here is the link for the Swift Wind article.
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/fan-articles/vehicle-of-the-early-week-swift-wind-scout-car/
Nahuris
-
I still want a FDC option for artillery . . . letting you mass the fires in a pattern set up, sort of like the bracketing rules in Aerospace.
-
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.
I should just like to point out that BattleTech isn't chess. Chess is abstracted to such a degree that the two really have nothing in common.
Also...being "sportsman-like" is the cornerstone of any game or sport...at least, when you play against other people it is...
-
Also, there are a LOT of misconceptions in the post about military being pawns .... I am a veteran, and yes, a soldier is allowed to refuse suicidal orders. While a commander can order troops into imminent danger, he cannot order suicide. There has to be a reasonable expectation of success, or that commander is guilty of murder, same as if he decided to just start shooting his own men. That is why morale is so important ---- and along with that, also understanding of the mission at hand ---- the worst soldier is the stupid soldier ---- you want soldiers that think and look for ways to fulfill their orders in the most efficient way, with the least losses and resource usage.
Now, you mention the beaches at Normandy, and those are great examples ---- most of those soldiers had trained for months, at least the first wave, because we knew that it was going to be rough --- anywhere we tried to invade Europe was going to be a hard fight. We figured that out fighting "Smiling" Albert Kesselring in Italy ----
Even Churchill noted that any time the allies met the Germans with anything resembling parity, that the Germans won --- they were experienced, and hardened.
However, that is bringing real world into it --- so I am going to try and keep it somewhat abstract, but answer as a soldier. I will charge a machine gun nest, over ground with some cover, and a means by which I see that it can be done. I was also an NCO, and responsible for men under my care --- and that is how it is worded and understood by the military. Those men were under my care, and I and my men were under the Platoon Leaders care, in the usual case, a Lieutenant, but not always ---- however, that individual, and the men under him are in the Company Commander's Care, and so on. Those officers are where you start seeing decisions made --- now crappy officers will order their men to rush across parking lots, because they want the awards and prestige for completing the objective. Good officers will look at the objective, and try and find a way to do it, without the heavy losses of men, and all the training dollars involved. And officers do have to account for losses. Officers that continue to lose men are held accountable, and we have cashiered officers for using too many men to take objectives ..... however, that line is difficult to define. There are many variables -- taking a hill where the enemy has artillery that is raining down destruction on your side is far more important, than say, taking a phone center. Yes, taking that phone center can disrupt enemy coms, but you can do that with jamming, or just hitting it with enough bombs ----- where as taking a hardened position, where the enemy is able to rain down destruction on your side, is far more critical.
Now, soldiers know this ---- we know what's necessary, and what's not, and we act accordingly. When you get called up for a critical mission, you do that mission --- because it needs to be done. It has nothing to do with who you are fighting, but instead, who you are protecting, whether it's your buddies, or your family back home. At the same time, you also don't use scouts for attacking fortifications, unless you have nothing else, and you don't use supply staff to engage enemy tanks, again, unless you have absolutely nothing else. That's why we have different units, trained to perform different tasks. Now, if my commander is ordering us to rush across the earlier mentioned parking lot, with no cover, and try and swarm a machine gun at the far side, as a responsible NCO, I am going to question that order. I am going to see if I can get artillery, or maybe a mortar team up to hit it from cover --- at the bare minimum, I want continuous support fire from as many sources as I can get, before I order my men into that ...... those men matter. And it would be the absolute height of negligence, as well as outright murder to do otherwise, than try and find another way to deal with that target.
And just to be clear, I am a combat veteran, I have seen enough of it, that I hope to whatever anyone holds sacred, that I never have to see it again. I enjoy games like Battletech, as well as Flames of War, and others, because I was trained to utilize my tactical thinking, and I enjoy the exercise of those skills ---- and I have found that whether I consider my "units" to be expendable, or not, whether I win or lose is based more on my tactics and how I utilize the board, not how I bargain my trades. Besides, no battle is a vacuum, and a smart commander preserves as many troops as possible for the next one --- experienced veterans are a valuable resource that no commander can be without ..... and if you just churn your troops through a meat grinder, then all you are doing is ensuring that your side is being fought for with only green troops, and costing them constant equipment ----- and no faction or side can long withstand that kind of cost.
Nahuris
-
There was a faction in Battletech whose hat involved constantly feeding their troops into the meat grinder.
They were called Clan Smoke Jaguar.
-
There was a faction in Battletech whose hat involved constantly feeding their troops into the meat grinder.
They were called Clan Smoke Jaguar.
Yeah, they had to develop Protomechs, because they were running out of materials to make full size mechs..... and they are where, now?
You can't just keep throwing units into the grinder like that without repercussions.... eventually, you have nothing left to fight with. They missed the first axiom of a soldier --- you job is NOT to die for your beliefs, it's to make the other guy die for his.
Nahuris
-
The first time I ever dealt with swarms was about 1995, or so,.... I was asked to play some Clan mechs against an IS opponent. So, I put together 2 Stars of Clan Omnis, as I was told the guy liked to field a company of mechs, with 180 tons of vehicle support. We were sort of balanced by tonnage, and fair play, as BV was in it's infancy, and that was what we had --- so, per the accepted wisdom, I gave my opponent a 35% tonnage bonus... building a Clan force at 65% of the tonnage or my Inner Sphere opponent. One Star was commanded by a Daishi, and the other, by a Mad Cat ---- the rest were a mix with a Loki, a Vulture, a Ryoken, a Dragonfly, a Nova, a Puma, an Uller, and a Koshi.
I showed up at the table, and found that the 180 tons of vehicles was 36 Savannah Masters ---
Now, I had agreed to the game, so I made the best of it, and for the first couple of turns, we closed using hills and trees as cover, and then on turn 3, we were close enough that he was able to rush 6 of his Savannah Masters out and surround my Daishi --- which hadn't moved yet, because I had won initiative that round --- and during the fire phase I killed 4 of them, but took the combined fire of the 8 mechs he got in range, on that Daishi ---- breaking Zell, but also having to deal with that level of combined fire
Next round, I lost initiative, and insisted on moving the Daishi first, to get to a low hill, where I could fire ---- at which point, because he had to move more than one unit to keep initiative fair, 6 Savannah Masters raced out, and surrounded the Mad Cat... which died during the fire phase, due to combined fire from 9 mechs, while the Daishi was crippled by the 3 remaining mechs due to having been so heavily punished the first turn of fire.... it was to die the next round to a third and fourth engine crit when I took an ammo crit in a side torso... already having one in the center, and one in the other torso. Meanwhile, my surrounded Vulture died that round. At this point, I was combining fire, and had taken down an Awesome, and a Trebuchet..... but realized that I was now having to choose whether to try and kill the Savannah Masters, or target mechs, and that regardless of what I did, it was now a battle of attrition, that no Clan unit can win.......
The thing is, losing initiative makes this tactic even more effective ---- my opponent even crowed when he would lose initiative, because he got to "stick one of my mechs, before I could even move" ----
That is the swarm tactic that people are against, and that many people here are talking about, and why initiative is a part of the issue. This tactic, if the terrain is good, and supports it, allows someone to use LOSING initiative as an advantage, while winning initiative only lets an opponent have one move, before it gets used, anyways. The thing is, this isn't a tactic --- it's using the initiative system, and a technicality of the rules, to metagame a victory over an opponent.
And while I joined the extensive list of players that refused to play him ever again..... that doesn't solve the issue, as it only pushes people like him to get their fix by beating new players, and making them turn against the game.... or, if he can't find opponents, he would show and either keep interrupting other players, or going on and on about how he OWNED you, and how afraid you were of his troops, shown by the fact that you wouldn't play him again. This lasted almost a year, before we got enough complaints together to get him banned from the store.... which I rather actually prefer, as I have seen too many stores willing to ban someone off of just a few complaints..... which may or may not be true.
The thing is, though, that this is a LEGAL play style in the game, that voids the whole game in favor of exploitation of some of the rules to create a means by which someone can get a victory, regardless of hard feelings. It's like playing a computer game, and fighting all the way to the end, only find that the code was written so that you get a message "Welcome to the end, we didn't expect anyone to make it, and you lose because we never planned on anyone winning, the goal was for you to keep pumping quarters, instead"
That is what I would like to find a way to fix.
Nahuris
Would you have been as annoyed if the guy had shown up with 36 platoons of foot infantry instead of Savannah Masters? By your definitions, that's a swarm but it's a slower one and you might have been able to last longer.
-
I'd say that's a world of difference. Infantry can still ruin your day, but they are slow; Anyone willing to field that much infantry in a vacuum game deserves the 25 hex-away Dire Wolf shooting at them (At least, that's how I'd handle it). Now, in an Urban or Jungle environment, Infantry can have a foothold as a swarm unit; They are hard to dislodge with Btech's more standard weaponry in close combat, and in a city, they can and will be a major thorn in your side.
However, with units such as Savannah Master, you have units that can cross a map in two turns-or less-with a cheap BV and Cbill cost, meaning you can spam the everloving crap out of them-both to get to your enemies, and spam that laser. One's not a terrible issue, but twenty six? That leaves a mark. Anyways, it's basically something I call the "Swarm enemy Syndrome" in First Person shooters. Basically, you get swarmed by fast, REALLY FAST enemies with pinprick weapons. You tend to have two ways of dealing with it; A fast-shooting low damage weapon to spread your fire, and explosives. In Btech, there is NO rapid fire weapon that you can spread your fire with that I know of. It's all on one target. And as for explosives? Those are not Tournament legal, while most Swarmable units are.
In response to people who complain that others find their strategy "Unfair" and "Cheap", maybe that should tell you something. In Nahuris' case, that's an extreme example of how bad a swarm player can be. I haven't played for long-a year or so-but swarm players are the only people I've seen who have that bad of a sportsmanship mindset, who belittle you for losing against their spam-happy tactic. And honestly, I can't think of a decent way to beat the Swarm tactic at a tournament level. Range only helps you for a few precious turns, heavy weapons'll only stop one or two (And heaven help you if you miss), pulse lasers are good but you encounter the same problems as heavy weapons-coupled with the thought of "I might not be able to kill them all".
(Speaking of which, I do find it entertaining that I am commenting on a match that I was born two years after, in 1997. I'm apparently one of the younger BTech players, it seems)
-
I don't think it's "bad sportsmanship." If there's that big of a loophole in the game, it should be addressed from a rules perspective. That's actually why we have rules in the first place, isn't it? To create an atmosphere of fair and competitive play. It shouldn't be the job of the player to create special rules to circumvent a bad initiative turn sequence in Total Warfare or horribly under-BV'ed weapons like Clan Large Pulse. These are well-known problems with the game which just aren't addressed in a timely manner.
If you want to bring 12 units to my 5, that should be fairly balanced with the current system. And some campaigns have already found ways to properly balance this without pointing to a lack of sportsmanship or making it a personal issue.
-
Yes, but Nahuris was refering to 26 Savannah Masters, and a company of 'mechs, versus two stars of Clan 'mechs. BV's not a good enough balancer for that, and... I'd be hard pressed to make it work without morale rules.
-
Yes, but Nahuris was refering to 26 Savannah Masters, and a company of 'mechs, versus two stars of Clan 'mechs. BV's not a good enough balancer for that, and... I'd be hard pressed to make it work without morale rules.
If a unit (any unit) is so valuable as to be capable of doing what a Savannah Master does in a large enough formation, then its value in combat ("Battle Value") needs to be reassessed. This particular tank is 215 BV. If it were, say, 375 BV, would it have the same effect? How about 400? How about 800? Yes, I know the latter is incredibly silly, but there is a Battle Value at which the unit starts to lose its appeal for abuse.
It could even be as simple as adding an additional modifier to PSRs for vehicles to ram a 'Mech. This could simulate the abstraction of a morale check, making every ramming attack an 11 or so for a 4/5 pilot. I'm spitballing and just making these up right now, but they're far better solutions than "you can't take X unit" or labeling someone a 'munchkin' for bringing more than Y number or something.
-
Would you have been as annoyed if the guy had shown up with 36 platoons of foot infantry instead of Savannah Masters? By your definitions, that's a swarm but it's a slower one and you might have been able to last longer.
It would have been different --- and I could have danced around and at least fielded a better game ---- although sooner or later, you do get swarmed, especially if the player is convinced that his troops are little more than zombies that just keep rushing at the nearest movement.
Tigershark has some good ideas as well --- with modern games, at least, and BV is going a long way towards fixing it. At that time, all we really had was tonnage --- going by BV2, I gave up more than 35% --- at which point, he would have either had less than a company, much lighter or poorer mechs, or had to cut his swarm force. And yes, it was also an extreme case ..... I have faced other swarms, and not had as much of an issue, using more modern rules. I have also found that Plasma Rifles and Mech mortars really ruin the day of units like the Savannah Master.....
In the end, swarms are something you are going to face ---- and it is never easy ---- but it comes down to how the opponent plays that swarm. If it is a defensive unit doing it's best with inferior equipment, but putting up a valiant fight, then it is great .... it creates a story within the battle, and makes it memorable and fun --- but when the goal is to exploit a rule, over play, then it gets less fun. I have faced opponents, and had them using just as many Savannah Masters, plus Gabriels and other tiny units. They operated in groups of 2 to 4, and honestly, that battle was great ---- although it did feel a LOT like the Battle of Hoth, and yeah, having 10 or 12 Savannah Masters hitting you from all directions is uncomfortable.... to say the least..... but he didn't try and exploit the movement rules to win a battle. He used a number of small units and a very fluid battlefield..... in the 1995 game, it was all about PPC and LRM equipped mechs, with the Savannah Masters sole job being to take away movement mods for combined fire. At that point, the player wasn't playing the game, he was playing the rules against the other players of the game. And I think that is where the difference is.
Nahuris
-
This is mostly applicable to the savanah Master Swarm, but what about deploying in waves? Now its on the swarming player to keep enough of the swarm alive while reinforcements move in every 2-3 turns. Once you reach a critical mass, the horde can do its job.
What about fighting on long, narrow maps?
-
The waves could be interesting, depending on the time between them --- too short, and it doesn't matter, and too long, and again, it doesn't matter. Realistically, no vehicle should ever willingly get into physical range on a mech, outside of very dire circumstances ---- For that matter, I assume that, as part of standard training, all vehicle crews get to watch a Banshee or equivalent kicking a Scorpion Light Tank around for a while. They should be VERY aware of what a mech's feet can do to them.
Mechs are the kings of the battlefield in Battletech. Tanks do not kick buildings down, and few if any other units carry the kind of firepower that an assault mech can potentially have, or deliver --- yes, some of those assault tanks can carry a LOT of firepower, but, they can't cross a small creek to deliver it, and they can't fall back on playing "Hulk Smash" when the ammo runs out........ and due to the limitations they have in the rules, they can't pack on the beam weapons, unless they have the heat sinks for them -- so are most likely to be ammo only weapons, and those are heavier, and run out of said ammo.
That said, in universe, convincing a crew to sidle up to an enemy mech should be something that only happens in the absolutely most desperate situations --- last stands, etc. So, with that in mind, playing swarms is not so much of a bad or poor tactic ---- as long as you are playing your forces against your opponents, and not, instead, playing the interpretation of the rules against them --- that's no different than the refs deciding a certain team wins ahead of time, and makes all calls based on that end --- it sucks, it's childish, and it's not fun.
Nahuris
-
A morale check makes sense if, and only if, the state is one in which propaganda isn't rigorously enforced and people have a more individualistic life value rather than collectivist life value.
There's tons of historical precedent for using groups of people as 'suicidal' pawns.
Most countries have, in the past, had a form of indoctrinating the young. It still happens in more subtle ways in every country.
When life meant less, such as feudalistic eras, the dumb/destitute who became part of infantry would have no choice but to try to live through even a suicidal attack, because the army was their life, in a very real sense via food and shelter. It allowed a lot more leeway to throw pawns away for a gain. Alexander the Great threw a far inferior force against a superior one to get through the main line after it'd split. That was clearly suicide for the inferior force.
A little miffed at the people who got to keep their political posts (Nahuris, etc). I made the effort for an all-encompassing post about historical basis for suicide squads, how indoctrination works (because we're born into cultures which indoctrinate us with values from the womb), all of which is important if we're discussing how "no grunts would throw their lives away in swarms to take out a mech", and also touching on the 'scrub' mentality in gaming which can find anything unfair or cheap, but facts don't seem to suit some people.
-
As far as facing swarms, I'd be interested in playing out on the non-swarm side to find the right counter to it. Maybe it was the system that was broken, or maybe there's already some way to beat it that can be discovered.
-
Okay, how is this: if I was going to take a Savannah Master swarm this is how I'd use it: two lances of SM supporting a 'Mech company. Say mostly Mediums and a few Heavies. The 'Mechs are the main combatants, keep the SMs on the flanks. Use them to control the battle: harass the enemy, try to keep them from going where you don't want them to go. Keep the SMs moving at high speed at all times, it doesn't matter if they don't hit anything or not, their job is to annoy the enemy enough that they ignore the 'Mechs to focus on the tiny little ants.
Imagine using the above tactics to keep an enemy 'Mech company from crossing the River Delta maps. How would that work out? Or would that not count as an actual swarm?
-
I suppose a more comprehensive system of morale rules than just Forced Withdrawal (which is basically "by the time this kicks in it's too late to withdraw anyway" most of the time) and the optional TacOps morale rules (which likewise are far more about potentially running away after getting hurt than about whether unit X actually has the guts to go through with a move it's still only planning and apply mainly to infantry in any event) couldn't hurt. I don't care which side of the mindless suicidal bravery vs. self-preservation divide any posters are on, there's just no way to tell with certainty which way any given individual or group will jump in advance -- especially not in a game where all we have to go by are a couple of skill numbers and maybe a name if somebody remembered to give them one.
As for dealing with swarms, seems to me that one way to avoid being prevented from moving would be to field more units equipped with jump jets, same as against players who love their Thunder minefields a little too much. Plus, if these guys are going to cluster up to deliver massed firepower, they might make for good targets for things like area attacks or swarm munitions...that's just off the top of my head, mind.
-
In the end, swarms are something you are going to face ---- and it is never easy ---- but it comes down to how the opponent plays that swarm. If it is a defensive unit doing it's best with inferior equipment, but putting up a valiant fight, then it is great .... it creates a story within the battle, and makes it memorable and fun --- but when the goal is to exploit a rule, over play, then it gets less fun.
Yeah. I can see that being about twelve kinds of suck. I might pull that munchkin aside after the game and say something about not being a jerk.
I have faced opponents, and had them using just as many Savannah Masters, plus Gabriels and other tiny units. They operated in groups of 2 to 4, and honestly, that battle was great ---- although it did feel a LOT like the Battle of Hoth, and yeah, having 10 or 12 Savannah Masters hitting you from all directions is uncomfortable.... to say the least..... but he didn't try and exploit the movement rules to win a battle. He used a number of small units and a very fluid battlefield..... in the 1995 game, it was all about PPC and LRM equipped mechs, with the Savannah Masters sole job being to take away movement mods for combined fire. At that point, the player wasn't playing the game, he was playing the rules against the other players of the game. And I think that is where the difference is.
Nahuris
If your opponent does this in the future, I'd suggest you start using Swarm or Swarm-I missiles from TacOps just to mess with them. They seem to be tailor-made for this situation. (And are named appropriately! ;) )
-
A little miffed at the people who got to keep their political posts
Use the Report to Moderator button. Political posts of any kind are prohibited, but when a thread degenerates into wall-of-text posts, offending material can blend into the background, leading mods to miss it. We rely on the rest of the posting population to help us find them.
-
Concerning the Savannah master swarm... Mechs can only kick one/turn. 4 vs 40 is only 4 possible kicks/turn.
-
Okay, how is this: if I was going to take a Savannah Master swarm this is how I'd use it: two lances of SM supporting a 'Mech company. Say mostly Mediums and a few Heavies. The 'Mechs are the main combatants, keep the SMs on the flanks. Use them to control the battle: harass the enemy, try to keep them from going where you don't want them to go. Keep the SMs moving at high speed at all times, it doesn't matter if they don't hit anything or not, their job is to annoy the enemy enough that they ignore the 'Mechs to focus on the tiny little ants.
Imagine using the above tactics to keep an enemy 'Mech company from crossing the River Delta maps. How would that work out? Or would that not count as an actual swarm?
Assuming that the other player has something on the order of 3-4 lances of mechs, that sounds like a very fair game.
Other thoughts might be to impose skill penalties should the force ratio get beyond some empirically determined value. Not sure what that would be though.
Assuming open terrain, what seems like a ratio for an even matchup? 4 SMs to a medium? Just guessing.
What about a house rule allowing flechette, and flak AC ammo as well as mine clearance and frag missiles to behave more like LB ACs? Treat as LB's, one size smaller?
And I just remembered something I discovered accidentally. Tear gas. >:D No damage to the vehicles. Gas will persist in a hex for 15 turns. Unless a vehicle has environmental sealing, an 8+ will give you a Crew Stunned result, and a mobility kill for 15 turns. They can still shoot after the first turn, but without that TMM.... >:/! Fish, barrel. Any questions? Its almost like a mine field that only effects vehicles and infantry. Unlike Thunders, launcher size is not a factor. So SRM-2's are just as good as SRM-6's... Actually SRM-2's are better. 50 rounds per ton.
That 8+ is hardly a sure thing, but keep rolling those dice, sooner or later you'll have vehicle crews coughing and puking in their compartments.
Depending on the level of rules lawyering you have at your game, the same missile that disperses tear gas could also disperse something a little more permanent. [whipit]