Breaching Pod Tactical 101

Sulfurdown

Mongoose
As part of taking on the Drakh as a campaign fleet, I've started to review any information out there on the assets available to me. Big thanks to CZuschlag and his ongoing work with a statistical and applied testing for the Drakh fleet (hopefully the full deal will get put into an upcoming S&P before he has to revise it for 2E)! :D

One thing, however, stands out to me. The faction ubiquitous Breaching Pod Wing. So many fleets have the wings and even have options to take flights of them as on-ship auxiliary instead of fighters. Almost universally they seem to be relegated to minor annoyances and written off. I'm hoping that the rest of you will join in with any stories of Breaching pod uses that stand out in your mind and a general trading of tactics, counter tactics, counter counter tactics (ad nauseam) to bring those drifting cans of Troop from "minor annoyance" to "irritating pain in the... "


I've collected some possible tactical uses for them from the forums as well as through correspondence, so let's kick the ball and see where it rolls. (I'm hoping for some of the stupidest and most brilliant uses that I would never have thought of!)

Area Deterrence; By leaving Breaching Pods in a sensitive area to slow down enemy ships or dissuade them from entering a zone. Probably best used by fleets that out range their opponent and so can fire for a few unanswered rounds as the opponent must either clear away the cloud of Pods, sweep wide of them, or barrel through and risk capture. In this case the pods act almost as a minefield.

Sieve Traps; Leaving pod wings in a debris-guarded area* where you can pass your ships through if being perused by enemy ships. This forces the opponent to either pull away giving your ship time to regroup/reload, slow down to the same effect or barrel through and suffers a potential loss of ship due to troop damage.
*Like between two longer asteroid fields.

Direct Hyperspace Insertion;** holding wings in hyperspace and using them to flood ships that end up within three or four inches of the vortex. No fuss, no muss, direct insertion defensible only by Fighters flying escort of the target ship. Useful for ships that have had their engines partially or completely disabled. This seems to me similar to mass-driver attacks.

**This is hedging into the same realm as the JPB so I will not take responsibility for any player’s well-being if they choose to use this. You know your group better then me.
 
fly them on CAP of you close in ships. yes they auto lose dogfights but they do leave enemy aux craft in the open to be shot down by main guns.
also when flying close to your fleet like this it stops the enemy getting in close or deters them some. I have had the pods from a carrier board a strikehawk before, much easier to destroy hull 6 ships with small crews this way :) also good for dealing with WSs/BSs.
 
Ok, so maybe Area Deterrence doesn't work as well as I hoped. I tested it in a Raid-5 Drakh v Pak'Ma'ra CtA using Vassal and in the end the Drakh selection was fairly weak (1 Carrier (4Hvy), 2 Lt Crsr, 12BPW) and I had forgotten the reduced range of the CL. By turn 3 most of the Pak' ships were infected with troops and some where well on their way to being done in, but I had lost one CL (adrift) and the Carrier was going down after having unloaded the raiders. The Pak fleet was middling damaged but had more ships and with the torpedoes and redundancy was making it difficult for the Drakh to make an equal impact. I image if the scenario had been finished and the Drakh had partially disengaged to give the troops time to kill off as much of the crews as possible they may have been able to make a strong come back but as it was the dice were not favouring them.


As an outcome though it brought to my attention a HUGE tactical benefit for Raiders in campaign games since they have access to both Breaching Pods and scavenger rules.

Scavenger Assaults; By using a number of pods to soften up targets, raider fleets can greatly increase the chances that they can recover adrift ships rather then destroyed ships (proviso they win the battle). Even a few successful rounds of crew loss from troops may be enough to bring the ship down without too much damage to the hull!
 
katadder said:
fly them on CAP of you close in ships. yes they auto lose dogfights but they do leave enemy aux craft in the open to be shot down by main guns.
I thought only Fighters could go on support of capital ships? Even if it is technically allowed, putting breaching pods on support is immensely cheesy, and totally against the spirit of the rules, the game and the B5 universe.

I've never really used breaching pods. One use I can think of is taking over decrewed enemy ships.. normally you can't do this because the "Launch Breaching Pods And Shuttles" special action requires the target to be stationary.
 
Burger said:
katadder said:
fly them on CAP of you close in ships. yes they auto lose dogfights but they do leave enemy aux craft in the open to be shot down by main guns.
I thought only Fighters could go on support of capital ships? Even if it is technically allowed, putting breaching pods on support is immensely cheesy, and totally against the spirit of the rules, the game and the B5 universe.

what you mean just like opening a JP you never intend to use ;) that falls into the same category for me. whilst its allowed within the rules it really is against the spirit of the B5 universe.
 
So why are you suggesting something which you hold in such low regard?

Hmm - does adaptive armour help against crew loss or criticals sustained from boarding actions? I know it's illogical, just wondering what the rules say :)
 
.............................................................................................................................. it's like a badminton match. :)
 
Burger said:
Hmm - does adaptive armour help against crew loss or criticals sustained from boarding actions? I know it's illogical, just wondering what the rules say :)

I assume yes, AA is similar to Pak Redundancy though. Possibly both need an official ruling?


Edit: I should really get better about the unnecessary rapid multiple posting.... :oops:
 
Sulfurdown said:
Burger said:
Hmm - does adaptive armour help against crew loss or criticals sustained from boarding actions? I know it's illogical, just wondering what the rules say :)

I assume yes, AA is similar to Pak Redundancy though. Possibly both need an official ruling?


Edit: I should really get better about the unnecessary rapid multiple posting.... :oops:
The answer is no - the wording of the Adaptive Armour trait is quite clear on this.
 
I dont get this... Breaching pods should be a viable tactic to use i believe it should be made easier to Board but no to easy.

Its like ramming. That should be made easier to do i think its just great when you can shout the words 'give me ramming speed'.
 
No. 1 Bear said:
I dont get this... Breaching pods should be a viable tactic to use i believe it should be made easier to Board but no to easy.

Its like ramming. That should be made easier to do i think its just great when you can shout the words 'give me ramming speed'.
That's why I opened a thread to get people thinking about them and trying to come up with clever tactics. I'd like to see the Dodge boost to an average of 5+ but the main goal was working with what is.

Triggy said:
The answer is no - the wording of the Adaptive Armour trait is quite clear on this.
What about Redundancy? (I checked my SFOS copy and it does indeed define attacks as AD under AA rules.)

Burger said:
I thought only Fighters could go on support of capital ships?
In double checking how AA was worded I ran across the SFoS update of Breaching pods - they are classed as Fighters but automatically lose dogfights and can't be used in planetary assaults.
 
I know in our campaigns we ruled it that crew loss directly from troops can not be reduced by Redundancy. Though if the troop causes a critical hit Redundancy can be used. Basically, we thought you can't make your troops more effective in combat by sticking padding on the walls, but you sure can weaken the force of an explosion.
 
By the current wording, Crew loss would indeed get a Redundant Systems save...something to address for 2nd ed. I feel :)
 
Sulfurdown said:
Burger said:
I thought only Fighters could go on support of capital ships?
In double checking how AA was worded I ran across the SFoS update of Breaching pods - they are classed as Fighters but automatically lose dogfights and can't be used in planetary assaults.
Where does it say that?
They don't have the "fighter" trait, so they are not fighters. The "support" section specifically refers to flights of fighters.
 
Burger said:
Sulfurdown said:
Burger said:
I thought only Fighters could go on support of capital ships?
In double checking how AA was worded I ran across the SFoS update of Breaching pods - they are classed as Fighters but automatically lose dogfights and can't be used in planetary assaults.
Where does it say that?
They don't have the "fighter" trait, so they are not fighters. The "support" section specifically refers to flights of fighters.
Try looking under the Breaching Pod trait :p "The Breaching Pod counts as if it had the Fighter trait."
 
Triggy said:
Try looking under the Breaching Pod trait :p "The Breaching Pod counts as if it had the Fighter trait."
Oh yeah. That is utterly ridiculous. In that case the "fighter" trait is totally superfluous since every aux craft has it. Hope it is fixed in 2e ;)
 
I think they used the Fighter trait to define it as a class characteristic. That way the rules can say "Fighters blah blah". Where "blah blah" could be the "Move after all Ships" or in scenarios where they state that "Fighters" don't count for a needed victory ship. Breaching Pods are a specialized subset of fighters and I guess inherit all fighter specific characteristics.
 
Burger said:
Triggy said:
Try looking under the Breaching Pod trait :p "The Breaching Pod counts as if it had the Fighter trait."
Oh yeah. That is utterly ridiculous. In that case the "fighter" trait is totally superfluous since every aux craft has it. Hope it is fixed in 2e ;)
The trouble is Fighter is appropriate in some circumstances and not others...I'll look into the wordings of it :)
 
:?: Are Breaching Pods recoverable after battle? Meaning if I bought 100 pods and fielded them (big battle), 60 were destroyed and the other 40 made contact. Can I "recrew" the fourty successful pods or am I just out the full 100?
 
Back
Top