Army Planning & Design

How do you plan/design an Army?

  • I approach it purely from the 'design it to win' perspective!

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • If I like the miniatures, I design a Killer Army based around them (with a few extras)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Its purely about the miniatures, what I like and want to include

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I have an idea/theme (not necessarily a winner) and models that I really want to use/try out

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • None of the above (please explain)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
I voted other. Tactical fleibility, as well as force cohesion are more important. Since I appear to be the only mo'fo in my are who plays this I have to ensure that the models I have can get the most "play" possible for the buck.

If it was about nice models (Or what I'd like) I'd have exo's, but the bugs come first :roll:
 
MaxSteiner said:
I voted other. Tactical fleibility, as well as force cohesion are more important. Since I appear to be the only mo'fo in my are who plays this I have to ensure that the models I have can get the most "play" possible for the buck.

If it was about nice models (Or what I'd like) I'd have exo's, but the bugs come first :roll:

Its harsh when its like that, I also play Rezolution and there is no one I know of where I live who does!
 
Well there are some plus sides I guess (like getting to decide what sort of forces are available, or being familiar with all the forces), but yeah it's a bit limiting.
Still I'm braking them down slowly, I might be able to get up to three players in my are soon... But then someone else will have an exo suit force ecause they're so cool and quick to build an army for damnit...

Oh the things we do for the hobby :D
 
Well I built my MI army around what comes in the starter box, with a few additions latter. My bug army is also centre around the warriors. As for the skinnies, I love the plastic fellows, so I based a army around them, with stratch builted skimmers, and a town to defend.
 
Oooh was it you who was goign to build saucer style skimmers OTS?
I remember someone mentioned it, but I'm not sure who. :?
 
MaxSteiner said:
Oooh was it you who was goign to build saucer style skimmers OTS?
I remember someone mentioned it, but I'm not sure who. :?

Yep, the STILL are works in progress, but I'm getting there. My wife wanted to watch a cartoon, and the Incrediables were on. While I'm no fan of the show, I do like the retro feel of it. The speeders on the Island are my inspiration. How about a walker, looking something like that big ball of doom that attacks the city??
 
MaxSteiner said:
Well there are some plus sides I guess (like getting to decide what sort of forces are available, or being familiar with all the forces), but yeah it's a bit limiting.
Still I'm braking them down slowly, I might be able to get up to three players in my are soon... But then someone else will have an exo suit force ecause they're so cool and quick to build an army for damnit...

Oh the things we do for the hobby :D

I actually bought some MI for two out of the four players we have now Lol!
 
I tend to design my armies around an unusual trick or gimmick that I want to try out (burrower + hoppers for example). The entire army will be designed around delivering that trick to the enemy. The tactics I've used are unusual enough that they always seem to work the first time around, but ONLY the first time around! :lol:

Also, I've tried several "no warriors" armies (based mainly around the Tophet, and jungle episodes of the show), and have actually had a great deal of success with 'em. I even tried one based around just Hoppers and Blisters. In the right situation it's not so easy to beat as you might think. :wink:
 
If I played bugs... I'd totally be tempted to play with no warriors and go for a force entirely made up of 'big' bugs... 3 Tankers, 1 King Tanker, 1 Brain, 4 Tunnel Markers, 6 Tunnel Entrances. 2000 points, PL3, not a warrior to be seen! Probably fairly impractical, over all. But it'd make me laugh a lot I suspect.

In all honesty, I'm kinda surprised how many people put down the 'start with an idea, and run with it'. I'll do that... To a degree. But I try not to totally abandon the things which work. I'd be unlikely to leave all 3 Tankers and the King Tanker on the surface, for instance, even if it did leave me enough points to buy a Plasma Bug and a second Brain Bug. I'd expect the MI to nuke me on the first turn if I did that, really. But I don't typically design armies for the sole purpose of being 'Teh Win!'.

Also: I'll stop randomly reposting stuff on this thread now (Yeesh. I seem to be making a habbit of this here and elsewhere... The wonders of being overly wordy and bored.)
 
For those of you who might be interested "Micromark" here in the US carries printer useable "Waterslide Decal" paper for ink jet and laser printers. In US dollars pricing is as follows:

Paper is 8 1/2" x 11" Try it pack for injet $9.75 one white background one clear plus fixative (Dullcote etc. spray). . . Laser Try it pack two clear one white $4.95

25 sheets laser clear $25.95 white $36.65

you can cruise their website at www.micromark.com

Anything you can create on your computer can be printed on these sheets and 8 1/2" x 11" is a lot of decal space.

Check it out. I have 25 sheets of ink jet clear and must try it out. Of course now I have a color laser so I need to buy the laser paper for higher quality printouts.

I hope this is of use to all of you. CudaHP out. :D
 
Im kinda off and on. I like making themed armies, but I make them good. I have a Welsh MI army being made currently, but my skinnies arent in the slightest themed. I will sometimes theme something, when others I will not. SST seems hard to theme.
 
:D

i tend to buy things based on the way they look, if i have no particular need for them . . .


i have the original 16 plastic powersuit MI, 8 metal women powersuit MI, and a squad of platic/metal powersuit PATHFINDERs and neo-dogs that i am just now getting arounf to assembling.


i am thinking i would like to buy the veteran powersuit MI and the ROUGHNECKS. this ought to give me a nice core of powersuit troopers to work with, plus the PATHFINDERS and neo dogs.


i would like to have around 3-5 MARAUDER armors to give the powersuit troopers some heavier hitting power (say 3 APES and 2 CHICKENHAWKS) .

for on other reason than that i saw the ROUGHNECKS episode with CHAS , i would like to buy at least 1 of these toys to play with.


after getting some WORD UP from others, i am also considering buying at least one box of the tripod mounted MG for more firepower at platoon level.


maybe i will get some RELIANT platforms as well for those defend the fort missions.


i do own a single LAMI trooper platoon (3 boxes) simply because i like MIF (men in flak) for sci fi games.


i have some very nice cardboard DIY assault landers that a friend printed off the internet for me to use as FLEET lander proxies, too.


i also have 1 brain bug, 1 tanker bug, 20 plastic warriors, 20 GALOOB warriors, and 12 GALOOB hoppers for the core of my ARACHNID ARMY.


DAWGIE
 
Haha... Kudos to DAWGIE for resurrecting a REALLY old thread...

but since I have yet to reply... I'd say I'm closest to liking minis and then having a theme around them, but I also at times just go for the best army.

I like playing with really powerful and versatile lists at times, and other times I just like to play absurd lists with like 80+ Warrior bugs.
 
Myself, I use my friends MI. We play 3000 pts with our bug player, and we split it down the middle, 1500 a piece. It makes for an interesting game as he likes to dig in and bring heavy weapon emplacements to bear, while I prefer more mobile forces.

I have a full Platoon of Exosuits (PAINTED), with 2 CHAZ, 2 Apes and 2 squads of Pathfinders and about half a dozen Caps left to paint. I might get around to it eventually.

My buddy has I swear to god a full company and change of CAPs CHAZ and a couple of Marauders.
We never win, but we have fun.
 
Oh, I missed this one :)

Anyone who has read any of my previous tirades on the subject knows I don't see the point in designing armies to win outside of tournaments, and feel there's been too much of a trend towards "permanent tournament style" in wargames, with a lot of new gamers today thinking the rulebook is law and approaching it as they would a boardgame, moving pieces around and working out which rules they can use to their advantage to win.

If my force doesn't feel "canon", then I lose most of what the point of wargaming is to me - recreating battle situations and seeing how well I can do against the expected result. I actually dislike choosing forces at all - I prefer a style of game where the scenario tells me what I have on the board, it feels more realistic to the situation a real-life military commander would be in.

With SST I usually go for squads of Cap Troopers or LAMI with a Cap Trooper or two in each squad in a Marauder suit (mostly a trooper, sometimes a corporal, never the sergeant, NCOs, or the L.T. unless theres a very good storyline reason why they are in there). I try very hard not to mix Cap Troopers and LAMI in an army because they were mostly used on different battlefields - I take either LAMI or Cap Troopers, except on extremely rare occasions such as where the scenario calls for Cap Troopers to be charging in to help extract a besieged group of LAMI.

The storyline behind the scenario/campaign is the biggest part of the game for me, so I adhere to it in my force selections.
 
i intensely dislike the "tournementt", "win at any cost", and "playing the rules, not the game" mind set that has swept through the gaming community since GW appeared on the screen as a major company. they have done a complete 180 from the original fun, use anything you own gaming concept of 40K: RT. . .


and man, i am a veteran of the WRG powerplayer wars, which i thought were bad, but the GW mindset is sooo much worse!


since the 70s, most of my (and my close friends) gaming has been scenario driven one off games, mini-campaigns, and full blown campaigning. moe beddah than competition gaming!

i win, i lose, i barely survive, etc, but i play to have fun, not to win at any costs.


that was why i decided _my_ MI assigned to duty as ship's troops with the FLEET in multiple patrol corvettes, would include at least a MARAUDER armor squad from the MARAUDER PLATOON (i tend to view this platoon like a modern infantry weapons platoon).


additionally, i have been drifting toward the concept that each powrsuit platoon, might include a MARAUDER squad (much like the old US ARMY infantry concept of the fourth squad being the heavy weapons squad). this too me makes since out of the 2-3 powersuit grunts in each squad having access to MARAUDER armors.


the full strength 30 bod powerssuit platoon serving as ships' troops would need to be _more_flexible and self reliant than larger MI units serving together, and i think would have a nice TOE that allowed for use of weaponry/equipment not normally found in a normal powersuit company TOE.


i am also assuming that the patrol corvette's , like submarines, have a very limited number of drop capsules for use with powersuits, exo-armor , and MARAUDER armors. another thought is that the patrol corvette has a finite number of drop capsule tubes/magazinies, and that there are two sizes of launcher/drop capsule (for powersuit, exo-armor, and a larger capsule for use with MARAUDERs or cargo insertions) a finite number of assault landers, etc. and in turn this implies a complete deck or larger portion of a deck for MI prep, launch, recovery.


another way of looking at a MARAUDER armor platoon for each powersuit company, would be like the attachment of MBTs to infantry units s needed now days, when they are available.


the exo suits,which i need to buy (among other things: the long illness/recent death of a family member have kinda suck money to a low for the time being), really make me think of MI from SST:THE BOOK . everyone would have exo-armor in this type of unit, maybe supported by the heavier MARAUDER armors?


my MIF troopers (at this time) occassioally find themselves on the same table with powersuit MI, but usually fight their battles without the benefit of the powersuit MI for support/re-enforcement.

since i do not have the MI ARMY BOOK or the KLENDATHU BOOK, i have not a clue about these troopers having access to limited numbers of MARAUDER armor. i am assuming they have all of the "shake an' bake" stationary weapon emplacement bennies, but again i do not have any of these, so i have not used them to date.


anyway, this is an interesting discussion!


DAWGIE
 
Well, see, this question is much more complicated than the topic makes it appear to be. I personally am a player who will always try to win (at any cost short of cheating or being an ass), but I may or may not make the toughest army possible. I may just use a diverse army that I learn to use really well. Eventually, I become so well versed with the army that the army seems like a win-at-all costs army because it is so effective. When the strategies I use are seen by others, they they could conceivably copy them, and suddenly you have a list that seems like a "win-at-all-costs" army.

Where is the line between making the army that you feel most comfortable using strategically and making an army that is "win at all costs"?
 
TIGER, i think the answer to this question of yours comes down to:

1. are you playing games and having fun, even when your ass gets soundly kicked, and:

2. are your buddies playing games with you and having fun as well, even when they get their asses soundly kicked?

i think most gamers will honestly admit to learning from mistakes and the tactics used by others against them. i know i always have done so, and this has forced me to use my much loved by me and scorned by others "army" to the best of my abilities.



sure i would like to win, but, hey, i can lose without crying foul to some one who is a better general or who has "hotter dice" on that fine day without going into a purple rage or suicidal funk (which i have seen some folks do over the years, believe it or not).


truth to tell, my wargaming "career" has had both glorious moments of victory (achieving local legendary status) and my innate ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory at the damnedest times due to wotever ( again achieving local legendary status!).


one more thing: i have had this "legendary" ability to roll anybody's dice and come up with the desperately needed number or numbers in any game system since i began gaming. (got a 05% chance of any hit at all? roll a 01% for a fatal wound in response! i need 2 on 2D6 to stick around and win the fight, you betcha! and etc). this happpens quite often, and i have been offended more than once by some clown i did not know at all or know well accusing me of having loaded dice. the discussion always ends when i begin to use their dice and let them use my dice, and they still get their butts kicked!

(at a DALCON many, many years ago, i have a plain joe SM terminator hold a hatchway against 20 genestealers, whack each one unto death, and survive the SPACE HULK game inspite of changing dice 5 times)


of cours when i have a bad dice day, i really _have_ a bad dice day, and cannot fight my way out of a wet toilet paper sack with a chainsaw and demo charges!


DAWGIE
 
Voracioustigger said:
Where is the line between making the army that you feel most comfortable using strategically and making an army that is "win at all costs"?

For me, if I sit down and work out the army list with a rulebook in front of me to compare stats and points values to get "the best bang for my buck", that is when it feels like "win at all costs".

Truthfully, I'm not 100% comfortable with players picking forces in wargames at all. I'm much happier with historical (or fictional) scenarios that tell me what my forces are :). The whole thing about picking forces is part of the tournament style, to ensure a fair and balanced game. I know a lot of people who feel that picking an army is an enjoyable part of the game, so I certainly understand it'd be folly to drop it from the rules as you'll end up alienating a large portion of your audience. I also think its important though to educate players in the alternative styles of play, such as the "rules are there just as a framework to help you determine the results of combat" style I prefer - for example I'm quite happy to make up house rules on the spot with my opponent if either of us decide to do something that isn't covered by the rules, while other players may be more the "rules are rules, the rulebook is law" type. Nothing wrong with either way, it's just a matter of preference.

Still, back to picking forces - I'll go with what feels right from the squads we've seen in the CGI (my chosen "canon" where the SST game is concerned), hence Marauders being something one or two squadmembers may take. Maybe I'd use an all-Marauder force if it was a special mission where I felt SICON would have authorised it. Maybe LAMI if I felt there were resource restrictions in effect. I'm still trying to figure out where to slot Exosuits in, though - most likely an elite force of some kind. My choices are made on what fits the story behind the battle/campaign. Of course, once the pieces are on the table I try and win with them... :)
 
I only get to play SST half a dozen times a year using MI (still not painted up my bug army), but like trying out ideas and varying things. This has a side effect in that the opposition does not know what to expect, and each game ends up different. Sometimes I'll use reliants, despite their tendency to fix part of your line, others wasps for that extra manoeuverability, others drop pods to pressure brain bugs. I love marauder suites due to their aesthetics. A pity that it is much more cost effective to put officers in them than the humble CAP as per the CGI.

In competition play I try to design an army that can cope with most situations and have an offensive option to deliver against the enemy. If likely to face large numbers of other MI I feel obliged to steer away from expensive models which in my limited experience don't survive and seem to give the opposition loads of victory points.

Mostly though I like experimenting with new ideas.
 
Back
Top