Jump to content
Pepsin

Infantry entering & storming buildings Storm after disembark

Recommended Posts

Hello

Just another question.  Is infantry allowed to storm building after disembarking from transport?

 

More toughs on subject: The FAQ explicitly forbid entering building after disembarking from transport, explaining that disembarking and embarking are different movement actions and you can do only one. However this limit doesn't seem to affect storming building. This creates paradox as you are able to enter building occupied by enemy faster than the empty one.

 

Am I correct or is there some limitation on storming?

 

Any idea if this will be balanced either way in future? I think this particular paradox is extra strange.

 

 

 

(and perssonaly i can't see no problem entering building after dismbarking, rules change would be nice :-) )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello

Just another question.  Is infantry allowed to storm building after disembarking from transport?

 

More toughs on subject: The FAQ explicitly forbid entering building after disembarking from transport, explaining that disembarking and embarking are different movement actions and you can do only one. However this limit doesn't seem to affect storming building. This creates paradox as you are able to enter building occupied by enemy faster than the empty one.

 

Am I correct or is there some limitation on storming?

 

Any idea if this will be balanced either way in future? I think this particular paradox is extra strange.

Drop infantry would be insanely powerful.

Only way you can enter a building if it's not part of a movement action. Ie cqb

storming is allowed as the move is considered cqb.

 

 

 

(and perssonaly i can't see no problem entering building after dismbarking, rules change would be nice :-) )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I spoke to Delboy about this and it made sense when we discussed it. 

 

In essence an empty building could be dangerous trapped etc etc and therefore when presented with the chance Infantry will look to check it out before advancing blind.

 

However when there are enemies in there that you can see and that are shooting back at you, you know that its dangerous you know that you are going to take casualties, and being in that building is better than being out here, therefore you charge in to take the building! 

 

Whereas an empty building presents no threat so you would not take the risk. 

 

Doesn't always come across well, but makes sense from that point of view.

 

Plus Drop infantry would be insanely powerful. At the moment by leaving the building empty of Infantry you deny drop infantry that opportunity (which is very good vs Nyx). 

 

However if they could just advance in straight away you would have to Garrison them, which means that some factions are actually just giving TV to the opposition, the way it is there is a tactical choice instead. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I spoke to Delboy about this and it made sense when we discussed it.

In essence an empty building could be dangerous trapped etc etc and therefore when presented with the chance Infantry will look to check it out before advancing blind.

However when there are enemies in there that you can see and that are shooting back at you, you know that its dangerous you know that you are going to take casualties, and being in that building is better than being out here, therefore you charge in to take the building!

Whereas an empty building presents no threat so you would not take the risk.

Doesn't always come across well, but makes sense from that point of view.

Plus Drop infantry would be insanely powerful. At the moment by leaving the building empty of Infantry you deny drop infantry that opportunity (which is very good vs Nyx).

However if they could just advance in straight away you would have to Garrison them, which means that some factions are actually just giving TV to the opposition, the way it is there is a tactical choice instead.

This is how I saw this as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind the rules as they are now, although I would prefer to see infantry able to both disembark and embark on the same turn. As it stands now, infantry can't take objectives (other than those in their deployment zone) during turn 1. This reduces the effectiveness of infantry in a game which usually only lasts two or three turns. It also reduces the effectiveness of transports with recon, since it doesn't matter how close they get to an objective on turn 1 - their payload will not be able to enter a building on that turn anyway. It also makes light vehicles far superior as a result, since they can take and hold on turn 1.

 

Personally I'd like to see infantry able to disembark and embark in the same turn, with drop pod infantry given a MAR like 'Rapid Deployment - Due to the demanding nature of their insertion onto the battlefield, units with Rapid Deployment are only able to perform a disembark action on the turn they are deployed'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind the rules as they are now, although I would prefer to see infantry able to both disembark and embark on the same turn. As it stands now, infantry can't take objectives (other than those in their deployment zone) during turn 1. This reduces the effectiveness of infantry in a game which usually only lasts two or three turns. It also reduces the effectiveness of transports with recon, since it doesn't matter how close they get to an objective on turn 1 - their payload will not be able to enter a building on that turn anyway. It also makes light vehicles far superior as a result, since they can take and hold on turn 1.

 

Personally I'd like to see infantry able to disembark and embark in the same turn, with drop pod infantry given a MAR like 'Rapid Deployment - Due to the demanding nature of their insertion onto the battlefield, units with Rapid Deployment are only able to perform a disembark action on the turn they are deployed'.

That's fine but drop troops should not get this mar. Nor terrans heavy inf.

Therefore I think the mar should be on the transport instead :) that way you can isolate pods and super quick ttansports to stop them being too powerful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a discussion that we have had several times, and it is felt that the lack of being to disembark and embark in a building in same turn hampers infantry quite abit when the game lasts only 3 turns on average anyway. The problem though has been stated that this would make Drop infantry super powerful in the T&H department.

 

Proposition I had was what about, you could disembark and enter a building in a single movement, BUT, doing so counted you as moving Flat Out. This would mean that, any infantry that does this, cannot initiate CQB, if they retaliate to CQB they count as firing Rushed, and they would not be able to fire off any MO they have.

 

This I thought might balance the issue as it means that, whilst infantry can drop and take a building in one turn, that infantry would then be unable to do anything else essentially until it's next activation, which leaves them very vulnerable to any retaliation and storming CQB, UNLESS they decide to make them priority activations on Turn 2 to remove that flat out marker, but then that screws with your activation cycle in order to do that, so it's a fair trade off, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a discussion that we have had several times, and it is felt that the lack of being to disembark and embark in a building in same turn hampers infantry quite abit when the game lasts only 3 turns on average anyway. The problem though has been stated that this would make Drop infantry super powerful in the T&H department.

 

Proposition I had was what about, you could disembark and enter a building in a single movement, BUT, doing so counted you as moving Flat Out. This would mean that, any infantry that does this, cannot initiate CQB, if they retaliate to CQB they count as firing Rushed, and they would not be able to fire off any MO they have.

 

This I thought might balance the issue as it means that, whilst infantry can drop and take a building in one turn, that infantry would then be unable to do anything else essentially until it's next activation, which leaves them very vulnerable to any retaliation and storming CQB, UNLESS they decide to make them priority activations on Turn 2 to remove that flat out marker, but then that screws with your activation cycle in order to do that, so it's a fair trade off, no?

 

 

That seems to me like fair tradeoff. It will enhance usability of infantry (which is terrible if you are in non-drop transport), and allow it to take and defend objectives. But what about storming? The paradox still exists, but smaller one. Are you considered flatout after disembarking and storming? Do you resolve your attacks during storming as flat out or not?

 

For balance purposes i am not sure if this should be allowed to any heavy infantry. The problem is not that some drop infantry takes building but that some ultra-heavy beast takes building, and this applies almost to every heavy infantry. Solution would be to allow disembark/embark as single action, if you do both, you are flat out. If you are Heavy infantry, you may do just one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A storming action is a CQB action, thus it doesn't matter for your movement action prior. BUT, you cannot flat out AND initiate CQB, thus if you need to move Flat Out to get into range of the building to storm it, you cannot initiate a CQB, thus you cannot call a storming action.

 

It's not a paradox, the Storming CQB is a CQB action, which is performed AFTER the movement phase, that gives you a free move as part of it, reason the only way CURRENTLY to disembark AND get into a building is with a Storming CQB action, because the Storming CQB action isn't a movement action so you are allowed to perform disembark movement, then a Storming CQB after. How it would work here is as said, if you have to Flat Out to reach the building, you cannot then storm it due to being unable to initiate a CQB. If you can disembark and cruise move into range of the building to call a storming CQB, that can still be done as it can be done now.

 

I think where you're getting confused in your previous action is that you're not differentiating a regular move and a Storming CQB action, it's two different phases and two different actions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's fine but drop troops should not get this mar. Nor terrans heavy inf.

Therefore I think the mar should be on the transport instead :) that way you can isolate pods and super quick ttansports to stop them being too powerful.

 

I'm not sure why you wouldn't give drop troops my suggested 'Rapid Deployment' MAR, since it would stop dropped in infantry from taking objectives in the turn they are dropped.

 

As an alternative, you could just give some infantry the ability to do both a disembark and embark action in the same turn. Maybe something like 'Take and hold specialists - this unit can make a disembark and embark move in the same turn.' You could even fine tune it to 'Take and hold specialists - this unit can make a disembark and embark move in the same turn, but count as having moved flatout'.

 

Maybe something the playtesters could consider?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or let the non drop infantry units start out of their transport. I play Terran and the more i play the less I take my light infantry as they are stuck in a apc turn 1 and i cant score any thing with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A storming action is a CQB action, thus it doesn't matter for your movement action prior. BUT, you cannot flat out AND initiate CQB, thus if you need to move Flat Out to get into range of the building to storm it, you cannot initiate a CQB, thus you cannot call a storming action.

 

It's not a paradox, the Storming CQB is a CQB action, which is performed AFTER the movement phase, that gives you a free move as part of it, reason the only way CURRENTLY to disembark AND get into a building is with a Storming CQB action, because the Storming CQB action isn't a movement action so you are allowed to perform disembark movement, then a Storming CQB after. How it would work here is as said, if you have to Flat Out to reach the building, you cannot then storm it due to being unable to initiate a CQB. If you can disembark and cruise move into range of the building to call a storming CQB, that can still be done as it can be done now.

 

I think where you're getting confused in your previous action is that you're not differentiating a regular move and a Storming CQB action, it's two different phases and two different actions.

 

Oh i know what do you mean. By paradox i mean general ability to enter occupied building faster, that is simply odd.

I was referring to your proposition of rules change: When infantry disembarks and embarks it gets flat out marker.

 

I just add: when infantry disembarks, and stroms it gets nothing by current rules (cruise movement to building, then free cruise movement as part of cqb, then possible entering). Was there additional flat out marker after stomring as part of your proposition? (if not there would be difference, between storming and just embarking infantry -> paradox of faster entering) I just add this is hypothesis related to your proposition, not to current rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aha, well as it stands no, adding an additional flat out marker was not going to be part of my proposition, as I didn't think it necessary to add such, the flat out penalty was mainly there to add some downside for infantry overall to be able to enact two movement actions in one go, but also as a balancing checks for Sky Drop infantry that can easily grab an objective via this new ability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if denying Sky Dropping infantry is the goal here, why don't you require that the transport be in base to base contact with the building in order to perform the manuever? Sky Dropping transports would be unlikely to Meet this condition. And certainly not consistently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I foresee a problem then that it becomes very hard for Sky Drop factions to ever capture any Objective then, even their own Tertiary, as generally ALL of their Infantry are coming in by Sky Drop, not just some. So it becomes 'Dindrenzi and Relthoza get to stand out in the open, everyone else can move directly into the Objectives'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except once they move into their objectives, Dindrenzi and Relthoza can then drop near and storm CQB them..! Especially with Dindrenzi's little rule of performing Storming CQB simultaneously. Jabri it will probably be harder to storm without something softening up the building's contents first...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See, then all you do is continue to perpetuate this weird 'It's better to not be in buildings' thing that's going on with Infantry at the minute. I want to see that stopped and have Infantry in buildings and cover, because that makes sense... :P

Any changes to Embarking/Disembarking should be across the board. Makes things much simpler, as their are no exceptions to remember/forget... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(sergeant): Take cover!

(squad): Wait take cover? are you insane? We'll die in seconds if we take cover!'

(sergeant): Ok we'll stay out here and dodge tank shells instead. 

(squad): Seems good.

 

 

I too would like to see a system that doesnt encourage the above behaviour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dindrenzi don't truly have a problem taking the Primary, well not really when compared to anyone else. And I agree, the infantry aversion to being in a building is a sad byproduct of the way the rules are currently. I would prefer if that whole silly scenario went away. The problem is that Sky Drop really mucks things up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its the power of the Sky Dropping infantry, and their likely hood of taking the objective off you thats the problem, not that they are Sky Dropping. If you were to whack Khitari in a Sky Drop mechanic they would only be putting out 13AD across 5 bases that wouldnt scare people anywhere near as much. 

 

I will put Infantry in buildings when not playing Relthozan or Dindrenzi, and I will do it in every game. 

 

I might rethink that when playing against the Terran Flyer with Infantry, but that still means that half the time i will consistently put infantry into a building, and the other half of the time I wont, but may spent Logistic points to put said infantry on Overwatch waiting for them to arrive. 

 

I can see why people might leave Infantry in the open, but I by no means think it is the default action.

 

Also I am not saying I don't want it to change, but I do understand why it is the way it is.

 

In fact if we changed it to being able to enter a building after a disembark from a transport then it would actually mean that people are more likely to put infantry in a building to have a chance (no matter the odds) to stop someone with Sky drop infantry taking their objective. 

 

It would also prevent building hopping (i.e leave one building to get into another on the same turn)... which is something worth considering. 

 

At least thats my view on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.