Fire teams and unit sizes

dyssnowman

Mongoose
Just a couple of questions...

In the preview thread for the Infantry figures, it specifically statest that the Brit infantry section can be divided into two fire teams. How will this be handled as far as game mechanics? From my understanding, the rules for BF: Evo draw a lot of the mechanics from SST (I don't think that this has changed, but you never know...). Going with this assumption (meaning that each unit can perform two actions in a turn), would each seperate fire team be treated as a new unit and thus have two actions of its own?

I know that this is really early to be asking questions like this since the game is not even published, but I was curious if either Matt or someone involved with the playtesting could comment on this.

My other question does not relate to game mechanics, but rather the first unit boxes for the game. I noticed that the four factions each had a different number of minis pictured in the same thread I mentioned earlier. The ETFT and MEA are both eight men strong, the USMC is nine men strong while the PLA is ten men strong. While this have any impact on the prices or will they all still cost the same amount?
 
1. They do indeed act as separate units. This can be a double-edged sword. On the one hand, you have greater flexibility. On the other, it is awfully easy to suppress just four men. . .

2. No, we are planning to keep them the same price.
 
dyssnowman said:
The ETFT and MEA are both eight men strong, the USMC is nine men strong while the PLA is ten men strong. While this have any impact on the prices or will they all still cost the same amount?


msprange said:
2. No, we are planning to keep them the same price.

now by my thinking this isnt fair on the MEA as there gonna need more troops than any one else so an army of them is gonna cost more !!!! maybe all boxes should be 10 men strong so as we collect we get free units for some forces ? also means we have spares for breakages ?
 
Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but really, if you can do a ten man PLA box for that price, then why not just put ten in every box? Doesn't seem like much incentive to play the other forces. It's like getting penalized for liking the Britts, Marines, etc.
 
Quark said:
Forgive me if this is a stupid question, but really, if you can do a ten man PLA box for that price, then why not just put ten in every box? Doesn't seem like much incentive to play the other forces. It's like getting penalized for liking the Britts, Marines, etc.

Or a bonus for PLA - glass half empty? :)
 
No, the glass is twice as big as it should be and therefore improperly designed for the task to which it has been set. :? :lol:
 
Quark said:
No, the glass is twice as big as it should be and therefore improperly designed for the task to which it has been set. :? :lol:

Ahh a fellow engineer, or cynic, there is little difference :lol:

LBH
 
Close LBH- my training is actually in Industrial Design (it's engineering but with more art and slightly less math) - with a healthy amount of cynicism (or "REALISM" as I like to call it) sprinkled in! :lol:
 
Quark said:
No, the glass is twice as big as it should be and therefore improperly designed for the task to which it has been set. :? :lol:

i love this, made me laugh so hard

but back to topic, infantry should be equal in price to each other in farness other wise it looks like mongoose arnt pricing to cost but to product, and therefor doing a gw gobble gobble just a point of view
 
Mr Evil said:
but back to topic, infantry should be equal in price to each other in farness other wise it looks like mongoose arnt pricing to cost but to product, and therefor doing a gw gobble gobble just a point of view

You are presuming that all costs are equal - the difference in price between the lowest cost infantry and the highest is quite substantial . . .
 
msprange said:
You are presuming that all costs are equal - the difference in price between the lowest cost infantry and the highest is quite substantial . . .

Are you talking about dollar cost to produce them, cost to me or points cost?

Just saying cost can get a bit confusing when talking about miniatures games.
 
was talkin production cost, i think mr sprange was talkng point cost.


if 10 men cost "x" to produce

why is some boxes of 8 costing the same as some boxes of 12 ? all boxes should have an equal amount of figs i them then the rule card will state inside how many opf these will make a unit, some armies will develop more units out of 3 box sets than others but all armies will ahve the same amount of minis for there 3 boxes worth. then we know what we pay is in relation to costs, not to pacaging.

just a point of view.
 
It's funny because that is almost exactly what Matt said in reply to post that I made on an SST thread; the cost is related to the production value not the point value.
 
So, each pack will cost the same (in Euros) despite the amount of figures inside? I'm cool with that because then you (probably) will get the same value (in points) armies with the same amount of money. I think that is pretty fair.

So, are there any more concrete info about how much these boxes will cost compared to cap trooper pack for example? I just visited my games shop and that pack had a price tag of 25 Euros. Will it be considerably more?

One more question:

How many squads per side would make a decent starting army for a normal dinner table sized playing area?

Thanks!
 
The price of the infantry will be $29.95 per box. That comes to around 25 Euros, give or take.

A game that takes about 2 hours to play on a 6' by 4' table could be fought with around 5 or 6 units a side. These need not always be infantry, however. It's quite possible to play a game with just one squad per side, and on heavy terrain a game this size might take around 20 minutes.
 
Mr Evil said:
now by my thinking this isnt fair on the MEA as there gonna need more troops than any one else so an army of them is gonna cost more !!!! maybe all boxes should be 10 men strong so as we collect we get free units for some forces ? also means we have spares for breakages ?

Well... My 1500pt skinnie army cost about 60 bucks, and my 2000pt bug army (with cheaper hoppers because of my conversions) cost probably over $200.

Based on the unit costs that I'm looking at now, no army looks like it will be that far divided from any other.

It's really not fair to the game designers to force them to charge different prices based on the unit's value in the game. Every player certainly wants a diversity of forces and that diversity necessarily entails that some units will be better than others. So, they have to charge us what the models cost or else they'll either lose money on their sales of some armies or be forced to price many armies as more expensive than they truly are in order to keep prices balanced based on point cost. (Would you really like it if they just doubled the price of USMC squads, so that USMC and MEA armies cost about the same price)
 
You're missing the point. Nobody is asking to have monetary values assigned according to point values. The point is that these are all human minis with similar paint jobs, they are the exact same size and use the same amount of plastic. The reason a box of Warrior bugs had fewer troops than the box of troopers was because they cost more to make. That made sense. So why, if you can put ten soldiers in a box for $29.95 wouldn't all the boxes have ten men?
 
Quark said:
You're missing the point. Nobody is asking to have monetary values assigned according to point values. The point is that these are all human minis with similar paint jobs, they are the exact same size and use the same amount of plastic. The reason a box of Warrior bugs had fewer troops than the box of troopers was because they cost more to make. That made sense. So why, if you can put ten soldiers in a box for $29.95 wouldn't all the boxes have ten men?


Dito
 
Back
Top