Pointless Units

[Knockman]

Originally Posted by Cat

GEV-MCP size question — a regular MCP is Sz4; so, GEV-MCP I'm thinking Sz5?

Details are in the free download, Section 7.1:
http://www.sjgames.com/ogre/sponsore...O-Rules-v3.pdf

Design details as dictated by His Supreme Overlordness himself :)

[Cat]

Originally Posted by Knockman

Details are in the free download, Section 7.1:
http://www.sjgames.com/ogre/sponsore...O-Rules-v3.pdf

Design details as dictated by His Supreme Overlordness himself :)

Interesting. I had forgotten the GEV-MCP was listed in that. I was working from the counter skins from the more recent PDF to layout my reference sheets. The counter skins do not show the 2AP.

Anyone know if that was a change or an omission? Drew?

[Cat]

Crunching the numbers for transports in the calculator gives lower values than what I had eyeballed, even allowing for infantry firing from the vehicles.

I'm happy with the lower values. I just hadn't started by subdividing AU/SU that low. Even at these values, they are slightly over-costed per calculator values; but come out in easy to handle values that will work for my purposes of allowing players more freedom in choosing the units:

Truck: 1/2VP (1/12AU or 1/4SU), infantry internal, no firing. [.42VP calculated]

Armored Truck 1 VP (1/6AU or 1/2SU), infantry may fire. [.84VP calculated]

Hovertruck 2 VP (1/3AU or 1SU), infantry may fire. [1.97VP calculated]

Philosophically, it's an easy hand-wave that the armored Trucks and Hovertrucks are designed for combat and thus allow firing. For my own use, the open armored trucks I'm using are Shapeways models with quad tracks so I can field them as either wheeled or light tracked units. They come in at an identical cost either way.
https://www.shapeways.com/product/D9...ionId=71043166


Joshua, the Hovertruck doesn't infringe on the GEV-PC niche. The HT has no attack value, a defense of only 1, and transport of only 2. Personally, I would rather have a base value for all the transports that can always be adjusted by scenario, rather than assigned by scenario only.

[wolf90]

The GEV-MCP on the reskins are using the Ogre Miniatures stats, which are the "official" ones at this time. That said, everyone is free to use what they wish in their games!

D.

[Cat]

Thanks, Drew. I have some proxy models earmarked for GEV-MPC use, but haven't built them yet. Will meditate on arming them or not.

While you're chiming in, is there an official answer to the question raised over here on transporting pallets: Of Transport Vehicles and Pallets

Hadn't thought to go cross-referencing in the Miniatures Rulebook. Poked at that just now and noticed that the LHWZ there is 3/14"(7), size 4 compared to the Iron Mountain 4/5. I think I'll stick with the Iron Mountain cardboard version stats, calling it a size 3.

Seeing the HWZ stats were AWOL from the Armor Units pages, I dug around and found them under Emplaced Weapons. Then noted that they are Size 5 in the Miniatures Rules compared to Size 4 in 6E(R). With any such discrepencies, I'll stick with 6E(R). But those tricksy GEV_MPCs have 2 different cardboard skins out there now...

[Cat]

And aha, the Hovertruck is listed at 2 Points in the Miniatures Rules.

[offsides]

Originally Posted by Cat

Hovertruck 2 VP (1/3AU or 1SU), infantry may fire. [1.97VP calculated]

Joshua, the Hovertruck doesn't infringe on the GEV-PC niche. The HT has no attack value, a defense of only 1, and transport of only 2. Personally, I would rather have a base value for all the transports that can always be adjusted by scenario, rather than assigned by scenario only.

Hmm... Per the Battle Box rules (and all rules before it that I'm aware of):

Infantry riding a Truck or Hovertruck are assumed to be riding inside, and cannot use their weapons until they dismount.

So I'm less than comfortable with just changing that without very good reasons.

I do see that HTs with internal INF come in at 1.47VP, vs the 1.97VP for "external". Given the tactical value of a M3/2 unit with a 2/1 attack, I'd push for an "armed" HT to be 3VP instead of 2, seeing how it has the speed of a GEV-PC and carries 2/3 of the INF. In fact, a 2/1 (double in overruns) D1 M3/2-GEV unit comes in at 3VP straight up, and that doesn't account for the possibility of the INF surviving a hit on the HT.

Yes, it's more vulnerable to attacks at only D1 and lacks the 1/2 attack vs a GEV-PC, but the primary purpose of a GEV-PC is to deliver the INF/use them to attack, and 2 AHTs carry the same firepower (albeit 1 factor at a shorter range) with the ability to split up upon retreat. Plus, at 2VP you're able to deliver twice the payload of a GEV-PC, and as long as you can drop the INF before you're attacked there's zero reason to spend the VP on a GEV-PC. So while I'm not totally opposed to allowing INF to fire from a HT of some variety, I think in order to keep it balanced it needs to cost more that the 2VP of a standard HT.

As for trucks, I need to run the numbers and think on it more, but I wonder if 1VP should allow INF to fire OR give D1, but not both, and have both be a 2VP unit...

[Cat]

With an established baseline of 2VP for a Hovertruck with internal transport only, that gives room for going up to 3VP for a more PC version, and then more wiggle room for pricing trucks.

That 3VP is over-costed though, two of them gives a bit more movement flexibility over a GEV-PC at a loss of firepower.

The motivating reason why I'm looking at this issue is that I'm using open-topped vehicle miniatures to facilitate moving infantry in and out of them. WYSIWIG suggests they should be able to fight just like in an open-topped GEV-PC.

[hcobb]

Biggest distinction is the seven hex down the road hoverblitz between internal and external carry.

[offsides]

Originally Posted by hcobb

Biggest distinction is the seven hex down the road hoverblitz between internal and external carry.

I assume you mean the fact that internal carry cannot dismount in an overrun situation? Yeah, that's a big deal.