Jump to content
Pepsin

Infantry entering & storming buildings Storm after disembark

Recommended Posts

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... :)

 

Making it access to infantry across the board is fine.. if it weren't for the capability it grants Sky Drop infantry, over other infantry as people point out. Make it so that infantry can disembark and enter a building in same turn, then Sky Drop infantry become godly scorers. So there has to be some penalty to deter that from being done, but not so severe that no one wishes to then do it, but if you make it too lax again it makes sky drop infantry too powerful etc... You may want to not see exceptions, but then something needs to give, else all that's happening is a leg up is being given to sky drop infantry even more, and you're the one that didn't want to see everyone get sky dropping infantry! ;P To which I don't mind, but you have to acknowledge that sky dropping infantry then throw a spanner in the works of anything like this if you don't want to make exceptions...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A mar added to all transports except pods that allows infantry to leave thr transport straight into a building.

All other transports except pods lose the assault mar ss counter bslance ... Not a hard problem to fix ? ...

Yes pods still can't jump out and eat your troops in a building. But thsys the point of pod troops.

As above don't stick troops in buipdings against relth or din.

Use your own troops to secure mid quickly with new mar force din and relth to pod

id.

Seems like an easy all round fix no ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless it causes Drop Pod troops to become essentially useless. Which I wouldn't want either, it's one of those things that would need testing, but I think my proposal of adding Rushed to any unit that disembarks and then embarks into a building same turn SHOULD suffice.. because i'd think even if Drop Infantry land and take a building turn 1, come Turn 2 they'll be Rushed (Unless activated ASAP) and will then be blasted at by every AP light vehicle, Heavy Infantry and then retaliation storming CQB infantry come Turn 2, and, hopefully, mauled horribly and slaughtered after that. But that could all just be in my head and none of that will happen at all and it'll be totally wrong, thus, testing! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not simply make it that Disembarking and Embarking takes away your '1 Initiate CQB' a turn. So if Nyx took your Primary, just cruise up and blast them out with Ap and/or Barrage weaponry, no chance for them to retaliate. I'm also weirded out by the fact that you can occupy a building then fire your weapons into nearby squadrons...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not give some "ground transports" a MAR that permits to disembark the Infantry in the vehicle's activation?

That would allow to disembark the infantry in the transport's activation and embark them in their own activation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would prob work. As pods have rear ech. Which stops them from activating and would mean that drop troops could only disembarl in their turn. And hence not embark.

That works but it's basically the same as what i said ;p that way you wouldn't need to change sny base rules just add a mar, and drop troops would stay as they are and normal infantry a little bit better. Job done .

Don't need to add any rushed penalt or anything. One simple mar and job done :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zebo, I think making it so they disembark but have to stay within 2 inches of the transport makes sense. That rule may make infantry too quick in one game turn. Disembark at a decent distance, then use their assault transport Mar for them to activate again and move a second time. The 2 inch restriction tames this issue and yet let's the models have some breathing room on the table, not having to clump up to be base to base or within an inch of the transport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you can't initiate CQB if you're Flat Out c0rrupted. :P It also makes you less efficient in returning CQB, and means you can't fire any of your MO weapons should you have them. Maybe the retaliating Rushed is overkill but simply making them Flat Out resolved your concern about being able to shoot weapons upon immediately occupying a building, partly my reasoning behind it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it seems that there are two suggestions then:

 

1) Grant infantry ability to disembark and embark, which gives her flat out token

-this prevents shooting afterwards, and initiating CQB

-this allows building hopping (but you stil can't shoot or initiate CQB!)

-both skydrop and transport infantry can do it. Therefore are more usable for taking objectives

-this allows some usability to the infantry

 

2)To make disembark action, action of the transport itself

-this prevents building hopping

-this allows disembark and embark for transport infantry

-not sure if this works for drop infantry (but how would they disembark?)

-you can initiate CQB, or shoot

 

The thing i don't understand is why is everyone so scared about drop infantry entering building after drop. I have played this way several times (spring, when i bought army and haven't read FAQs, my terrans against dindrenzi), it wasn't that bad. Sure you had to count with it, but it wasn't unbeatable. More: The idea that to protect your home objective you have to abandon it, so it won't be stormed, is simply hilarious.

the Dindrenzi or relthoza infantry may storm the building on your home objective, but they will be immediately counterattacked by infantry or blasted by some heavy weapons. Taking middle to gain foothold seems to be much more viable, but still you can take countermeasure by putting your recon units to position for counterattack. The real problem occurs when this is done by something thought you can't smoke out easily. Essentially every heavy infantry. Relthoza's heavy in spires, or terran's heavy in their aircraft. The idea about these entering some building (not necessary objective, anything which can be stormed, even by current rules) and shooting to side of your tanks, while you can't prevent it, is unpleasant one.

 

Personally I would prefer solution number one, with some additional fixes. Heavy infantry would be forbidden from disembarking and  embarking/storming in same turn (but you can initiate CQB against anything, even in building). After storming you would also get flat out marker (so no shooting, and more vulnerable afterwards).

That way you would make normal infantry better for taking objectives (which is almost impossible by ground transport infantry now), while preventing it to gain immediate fortification AND shooting and attacking your own units, and giving you suitable window of oportunity to take care of situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pepsin, as a Dindrenzi player myself I'll vouch for the Nyx's ability to take (and hold the hell out of) a primary objective under the current rules. You're concern about the heavies is not unmerited, but bear in mind that the Nyx are the heaviest light infantry we have AND can now be brought on table in grand company sizes on a droppod that itself can cripple multiple units. Even barring the entrance of the field support helix from the equation one can still drop the intended squadron(s) last in a turn, minimizing retaliation before alot of TV has been scored. There have long been complaints about the Dindrenzi being unbalanced (in both games) so there is alot of focus on keeping their current balance intact. I myself in the play-testing have often heavily attacked ideas for new abilities and units for the Dindrenzi based merely on player's of other forces assumed reactions. While I admit that something needs done to improve the value of infantry as a whole, we need an answer that doesn't create further problems. I still believe strongly that the best answer is to give an ability to transports that is limited by skydrop model's own weakness, accuracy. A player can plan a drop down to roughly a 6" area at best, and that includes enough luck to not get a bad deviation direction twice. Planing to end touching a specific building is not very easy, it can be done but just driving a ground model up is MUCH more likely. This is why I recommended the simple addition for infantry in the movement section that they can move directly between buildings and transports if the two occupible models are within base to base. With a potential add-in that building to building is possible within a certain range (either cruising or a set distance like 4".)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.......

 

That would certainly be good solution

1) it would improve usefulness of infantry

2) It would be easy to implement (just few lines in the rules), and easy to understand

3) as it is small change, it would be relatively easy to test

 

However it wouldn't solve paradox of the fact that storming is faster than entering :-)

 

About activating last, it is certainly an option, but aren't you afraid of some units on overwatch, or something sitting on or near your drop sites (at least the expected ones) to force you CQB on drop pod for overfly? (and therefore resulting your infantry emerging from wreckage activated). I must admit that i haven't tested this much by myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bear in mind, you fire rushed shots on Overwatch. Mathematically we're talking 20.84 AD to have a reliable chance to pop the Nyx's transport, that's a front line unit doing nothing so you can cover your primary. Factoring in CQB from flyover followed by Overwatch it is feasible, but we're still talking devoting 400+pts of your force to stop a single ~250pt squadron's tactic. Both drop armies carry 4 squadrons in their core helix alone. The loss of one unit in a small game isn't worth the risk (potential 3TV scored for a primary vs 4 lost from a flummoxed drop) but in a 6k+ it's 12TV vs the same risked squad. That said, I still drop next to an occupied objective building and storm it when given an opportunity in 3k games often because I know I can do it successfully. Even if I fail I can keep coming at you with another drop. As it stands, I'm looking at bringing into play ~8 take and hold drop units in my force and I didn't intend for it to be a drop list. I'm leaning towards just hitting hard and fast blitzkrieg style and getting the TV via unit destruction. The helixes I'm using to get that effect just happen to have these take and hold models, there's no sense in NOT including them. Even if it's not my intended tactic I'm not going to turn down a decently easy 12TV. Now flip that over to people who that's plan A not plan B like it is for me.... trouble if we make it easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Max, you are correct. But a squad of equally priced infantry such as Sorylian lights with a sergeant and 3 gun bases will most likely win in the end. It will kill one base easily with overwatch, just about 2 bases if it's lucky. Then the CQB will be pretty close. Statistically, the Nyx will kill 2 bases, close to 3. The Mul'Kats will kill just 9.6 DR or bases, so pretty close to 2. That makes it a tie. Even if the Nyx win and kill 2 while losing 1 in CQB, the Sorylians will not be pushed out because they do not have more models in base contact with the building so they will be sitting ducks to the tons of scatter weapons (just so happen to be one of Sorylians' favorite weapons). I guess I'm not sold that the Nyx are as incredible as you are making them out to be.  There is no question Nyx are great, but not unbeatable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I'm not saying they're unbeatable, but on a 1-10 scale with 1 being useless and 10 broken they rate atleast a solid 8 when it comes to their use as objective takers. To use the view of other games, their utility outweighs their points more often than not. My concern is that if the approach to improving infantry doesn't take the Nyx's strengths into account they could prove to be bumped to 9.5-11 on that scale. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never seen my Terran opponent have much trouble using a combo of Heimdals, Vidars and Valks on overwatch to wreck any Pods and Nyx squads. They're such short range that it's not like they'll be shooting at anything else anyway.

Thats like telling me my entire Core Helix needs to be on Overwatch to stop a couple of transports...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats like telling me my entire Core Helix needs to be on Overwatch to stop a couple of transports...

 

This would be my point. Nyx are tough for most players right now, not unstoppable just on the high end of the balanced range. Giving them the ability to waltz into a building straight from their pods with little or only minor(relatively) limitations could tip them outside that range.

 

I don't think so much that its their stats/cost/etc directly, as it was once said they are very 'cost effective.' AKA for the points they're very mean buggers. But as it stands, people avoid occupying their home base objectives as a defense; we know this as it's one of the major complaints here. Yes there are perfectly viable ways of dealing with them, not everyone seems to have pinned those methods down or believes (from experience) they work. As the guy who gives them that headache I admit they're a tough cookie, and honestly don't want to see it worse. Giving them carte blanche with the rest of the infantry or handing a 'fast deployment' rule/MAR to the non-drop infantry/transports but not the 'assault troops/transport' are just not viable options to me. The first risks turning a last second grab of an occupied objective for TV into an end of turn 2/3 to all the objectives game ender. The second is just silly lorewise, thematically, and logically on the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we allow troops to disembark and embark a building, Nyx become OP.

If we dont, the whole issue of only being able to take a building if it's embarked by enemy troops and not if they aren't is a problem.

If we make it so ground transports can unload their troops into a building if they are touching it, we still have the drop pod storming CQB + no empty building entering problem.

If infantry gain a quality where they can disembark and embark in the same turn while losing their ability to use main ordnance and iniyiate CQB and have rushed CQB in defense, Nyx are still able to use storming CQB. So, this helps non drop infantry, but Nyx are still a problem.

It seems to me that Nyx just make enemies have to play defensively in many cases, even with no rules change. Maybe that's part of the problem. Nyx need some more looking at possibly.

I think Drakere's area of letting troops disembark and embark on the same turn, losing main ordnance and the ability to initiate CQB plus rushed defense CQB is a pretty great start. That makes NYX who have taken an empty secondary objective softer against enemy CQB and storming CQB against them may not go in their favor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Nyx are designed to be specialists at storming occupied buildings, someone was going to be so this is nearly unavoidable. As it is now the Nyx can drop in at the end of a turn and grab an occupied objective netting between 1/5th and 1/8th of the game's starting TV. The defense is that the objective is kept unoccupied; it's silly, generally works, and could use looking into but it's not the problem I'm addressing. It's a warning sign though. If Nyx can semi-reliably take unoccupied buildings in one activation (even if they all get wiped out the following turn) there's a twofold issue. First the primary defense everyone does have is gone, poof. Second, the tactic for the Dindrenzi suddenly becomes an end of turn scramble to grab every objective and net upto half the starting TV. It's painful to think about as I currently win the majority of games without paying much attention to capturing objectives. The reasoning I have for the touching the building idea is it's one thing for a skydrop to have a target area of "I want to be within 6-10" of building A" and a whole nother  for "I need to scatter to touching or directly on top of building A." The change takes advantage of the semi unreliable-ness of drops and adds it to the new addition of one action deploy and capture tactics for drop troops. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

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.