Unwinnable tournament scenario - Who Dares Wins Game 1
- Thread starter lastbesthope
- Start date
lastbesthope
Mongoose
Not so much, the PLA have the advantage on attack as they can field 2 tannks and just charge across.
USMC not bad, you know how much I hate Shadows.
No real judge on the MEA.
LBH
USMC not bad, you know how much I hate Shadows.
No real judge on the MEA.
LBH
I think the MEA have an excellent chance on the attack - on the Tunguska the quad 30mm does a massive 8xD6+1 attacks. Admittedly it can only fire once per turn, but with a need to move across the board thats not much of a hardship. 2 of those, plus 3 technicals should easily be enough to get a win. I'm fairly certain at least one variant of this force will be seen on the day. On the defense they are also nasty with lots of rockets.
I don't play MEA, but Swiss Tony (my regular opponent) does and it just destroys infantry platoons.
I don't play MEA, but Swiss Tony (my regular opponent) does and it just destroys infantry platoons.
Lorcan Nagle
Mongoose
lastbesthope said:
Gah?
Mr Evil said:just out of interest how do the usmc and eftf compare when it comes to attack ?
much better than any other force id say
Err both the PLA and MEA can afford to buy 2 of their heavist unit, and have one of them as a command unit, giving them an extra action to cause trouble.
Each force can field a very nice attacking force, I would put the PLA top then EFTF, USMC and then MEA bring up the rear but really not that far behind the rest.
Mr Evil said:well for a start its not unwinnable for the EFTF or USMC
V MEA No problem
V PLA Bunkers realy stuff them over, and as a defender you can have bunkers
on the pther side of the table on the attack the EFTF and the USMC are by far the most dangerouse force out their V each other its going to be a case of bunkers V target priority.
its on a dice EFTF V USMC on who gets to attack both have some real killer units for this shadows and warriors making amazing attack units in this scenario that give pla and mea on defence some real huge problems game wise..
on defence usmc and brits could just take loads of recon or sas units from their force list and stick them in big bunkers for example. the other forces dont get this sort of advantage of sich a specialist unit. EFTF could deploy a units of sas in a bunker up front and then later on deploy other sas unit behind enemy in their deployment zone, this will mean they will survive or they will drag enemy form exiting your table edge as they go back to confront them.
i think the problems the eftf have as do the yanks for this scenario in defence is ballanced by their strength on the attack of that scenario.
just how i see it and how we have found in games we have played thus far.
So the best the EFTF or USMC could hope for is that their opponent is to stupid to realise that they need to get their vehicles off the other side of the board to at least draw. Oh and if they can kill half a unit of eithers force and drive off the other side they will win. Yes using bunkers will help a little, but no more than any cover. Every force has acess to them, and they also have acess to AT weapons....
my point is on the attack the usmc and the EFTF have the largest advantage. so it sorta ballances out.
it is a very hard game to win in defence thats the point of the scenario. what it will do as a first game is give the PLA and MEA armies a chance to get a good statrt on the other missions the EFTF and USMC have clear advantages as well.
i think this scenario is a good idea as a starting scenario will make the 2 best forces work hard 50% of the time (ie if they end up defenders)
if usmc or eftf get the attack and they fail to win this scenario they should hang their head in shame.
it is a very hard game to win in defence thats the point of the scenario. what it will do as a first game is give the PLA and MEA armies a chance to get a good statrt on the other missions the EFTF and USMC have clear advantages as well.
i think this scenario is a good idea as a starting scenario will make the 2 best forces work hard 50% of the time (ie if they end up defenders)
if usmc or eftf get the attack and they fail to win this scenario they should hang their head in shame.
lastbesthope
Mongoose
Mr Evil said:
It would balance out if you played both ends of the game, maybe, almost, because the USMC and EFTF are disadvantaged in defence and not really advantaged in attack.
As for it being a good idea for a starting scenario, I think not. 2 EFTF players with identical armies and identical tactical knowledge. Both pay PLA players (of similarly equal standards) in seperate Rolling Thunder scenarios. The one who gets to be the attacker is very likely to come out of the game ahead of the EFTF player who is defending, simply on the roll of a dice.
Not balanced, not in my mind.
LBH
EDIT, and not just because I'm an EFTF player, the same thing applies to USMC players as well.
Mr Evil said:
but they don't. The PLA actually is the most powerfull force in attack as it can take 2 tanks and one of them as a command varriant. All factions have powerfull attack forces for this scenario, but I would say that the USMC are actually 2nd weakest with only the MEA being slightly weaker, as their "tank" has a target of 7 and 5+ armour, but then it has a gun that fires 8xD6+1 (only once per turn adimtedly) at range 40" so it should be able to keep out of range and trundle off the other board edge with 2 many problems.
Captain_Nemo
Mongoose
I can't believe we are still harping on this...I am going to go meet a buddy in 20 minutes (it's 18:10 Local) and playtest this at 750 Points just to check it out. I think we can run 3 or 4 times tonight I'll let y'all know how it goes.
Captain_Nemo
Mongoose
OK Joe and I got started here are our Armies
Me: 2 PLA Type 99 with Command Option 750 Points
Joe: 2 EFTF Infantry Squads, 1 EFTF Command Squad
2 Small Bunkers, 1 Minefield, and Heavy Artillery Strikes
Game 1
I charge across the board intent on the Objective of getting to the otherside. No Contact!
"Aha! says I, A Draw. "
"No says Joe, You win. Your unit total is greater than mine. Read the Victory Conditions."
DOH! Says I.
Game 2
In the interest of fairplay I opt for the old " Hey Diddle Diddle, Straight up the Middle!" routine.
I engage the wiley Englishmen at close range and they Laugh at me.
Unlike the Abrams and Challies my popgun tank cannon cannot cause a kill shot on the bunkers. Sure I forced some saves but he made them or I did not put enough hurt on him to break one....
Running out of time I charge through a minefield (no effect BTW ) and leave the Board. I still manage a win...unbelievable.
Game 3
This time I use USMC I DID NOT play this one smart. I got stupid. I used 1 Abrams, 2 Half Squads (Team 2 Removed) mounted on 2 Shadows for a total of 720 Points
This is a bad example in a fit of weirdness, I actually tried to assault the bunkers and between the arty and reactions from the EFTF I got whiffed. I did get to kill about 6 EFTF guys trashing a fire team's worth from one squad and killing the RTO and Sgt for the Command Squad.
He killed off both my squads and 1 Shadow. The sick thing is I still had more units points than he did....
After the Game Discussion Lessons Learned:
The EFTF will have the toughest time in the attack. You need 2 squads to fulfill your requirements for a Chally and you will be hard pressed to make it so. And be effective. Maybe 2 half squads in a warrior?
Emplacements are a better value than Arty or Minefields, in the defense. I like that really.
The toughest nut to crack will be the PLA:
3 Infantry squads without Team 2 and 3 Small Bunkers placed within supporting range of each other and a whole lotta PF-89 Love to share.
EEeewww Ugly.
Yes the scenario sucks but Gaddam it is fun!
Me: 2 PLA Type 99 with Command Option 750 Points
Joe: 2 EFTF Infantry Squads, 1 EFTF Command Squad
2 Small Bunkers, 1 Minefield, and Heavy Artillery Strikes
Game 1
I charge across the board intent on the Objective of getting to the otherside. No Contact!
"Aha! says I, A Draw. "
"No says Joe, You win. Your unit total is greater than mine. Read the Victory Conditions."
DOH! Says I.
Game 2
In the interest of fairplay I opt for the old " Hey Diddle Diddle, Straight up the Middle!" routine.
I engage the wiley Englishmen at close range and they Laugh at me.
Unlike the Abrams and Challies my popgun tank cannon cannot cause a kill shot on the bunkers. Sure I forced some saves but he made them or I did not put enough hurt on him to break one....
Running out of time I charge through a minefield (no effect BTW ) and leave the Board. I still manage a win...unbelievable.
Game 3
This time I use USMC I DID NOT play this one smart. I got stupid. I used 1 Abrams, 2 Half Squads (Team 2 Removed) mounted on 2 Shadows for a total of 720 Points
This is a bad example in a fit of weirdness, I actually tried to assault the bunkers and between the arty and reactions from the EFTF I got whiffed. I did get to kill about 6 EFTF guys trashing a fire team's worth from one squad and killing the RTO and Sgt for the Command Squad.
He killed off both my squads and 1 Shadow. The sick thing is I still had more units points than he did....
After the Game Discussion Lessons Learned:
The EFTF will have the toughest time in the attack. You need 2 squads to fulfill your requirements for a Chally and you will be hard pressed to make it so. And be effective. Maybe 2 half squads in a warrior?
Emplacements are a better value than Arty or Minefields, in the defense. I like that really.
The toughest nut to crack will be the PLA:
3 Infantry squads without Team 2 and 3 Small Bunkers placed within supporting range of each other and a whole lotta PF-89 Love to share.
EEeewww Ugly.
Yes the scenario sucks but Gaddam it is fun!
Why where you trying to shoot the bunker? Just shoot the troops inside. All they get s a cover save. (assuming they are in LOS of course)
Taking infantry in attack is a waste of points I feel, afterall your most important objective is to get off the other side of the board. Take Shadows and keep them at range popping missiles as they drive round to the escaping board edge, and use the Abrams to cause damage as it goes straight through your opponents forces, when they have no AT to speak of.
I agree this scenario will be huge amounts of fun when each side can take both attacker and defender and have a chance of winning.
Taking infantry in attack is a waste of points I feel, afterall your most important objective is to get off the other side of the board. Take Shadows and keep them at range popping missiles as they drive round to the escaping board edge, and use the Abrams to cause damage as it goes straight through your opponents forces, when they have no AT to speak of.
I agree this scenario will be huge amounts of fun when each side can take both attacker and defender and have a chance of winning.
Why do you need infantry to take shadows? All you need to do is spend the points from your army list, your army list needs to be drawn up following the force requirements.
Short range is a bit of a bind for the PLA in defence, but you can use terrain to limit the harm done by that.
Short range is a bit of a bind for the PLA in defence, but you can use terrain to limit the harm done by that.
The Old Soldier
Mongoose
Well, the normal platoon list shadows as SUPPORT, you have to have Squad units to gain Support units.
Captain_Nemo
Mongoose
Cordas wrote:
:lol: :lol: :lol:
I forgot that these rules are fairly ambiguous, It's a Bunker see??? So if it is a Bunker than anything less than a Main Gun is going to bounce off, Right??? So I tried to kill the bunkers because in my mind anything less than a LAW won't hurt anyone inside, Get it? It's all my fault I shouda just shot the troops if what you say is correct I left my book at home....
Cordas also wrote:
Again my fault but I read the Shadow card as being TRANSPORT it's on the bottom of the card in capitals so I ain't yelling atcha.
If you take a TRANSPORT you need something to put in it hence the Infantry requirement as pointed out by Evil and The Old Soldier.
Sorry about that.
Talk to y'all later.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
I forgot that these rules are fairly ambiguous, It's a Bunker see??? So if it is a Bunker than anything less than a Main Gun is going to bounce off, Right??? So I tried to kill the bunkers because in my mind anything less than a LAW won't hurt anyone inside, Get it? It's all my fault I shouda just shot the troops if what you say is correct I left my book at home....
Cordas also wrote:
Again my fault but I read the Shadow card as being TRANSPORT it's on the bottom of the card in capitals so I ain't yelling atcha.
If you take a TRANSPORT you need something to put in it hence the Infantry requirement as pointed out by Evil and The Old Soldier.
Sorry about that.
Talk to y'all later.
I am not sure what the tournament rules are regarding taking support and transports. It was my reading that your army list had to be drawn up using the faction briefing, but when it comes to games played in the tournament you can just take whatever you want from your army list.
Of course games played not in this tournament must follow faction force lists, UNLESS you decide to play purely on points value which is also valid.
Page 3 of the tournament rules said:
Of course games played not in this tournament must follow faction force lists, UNLESS you decide to play purely on points value which is also valid.
Captain_Nemo said:
*LOL* We all make mistakes like that.... one of my mates was most put out to find his Shadows could actually fail 3 armour saves not 2 as he had miss-read. I know I have made such mistakes but I carefully edit them out of my memory so I can pretend I never have. Although there is nothing mentioned in structures or emplacements that says you have to destroy them before you can shoot the troops inside.
lastbesthope
Mongoose
I have had it confirmed from Matthew, only the 3500 point list in the tournament must conform to the force construction list, other than that, individual forces for the scenarios are anything goes, you could even field 2 Command squads in the first scenario if you wanted to, I won't be though.
LBH
LBH
