We're gonna give BF:E and Hiro's cards a try Wednesday
- Thread starter nezeray
- Start date
dyssnowman
Mongoose
Col. Hammer said:
I don't think that they said that the Apache is too powerful in so many words, just that it would run in excess of 800 point a piece.
Which means they've scheduled the apache and other big point value units farther back in the release schedule to give people time to build armies that can utilize them, or units to counter them.
Also such units may not even appear on the tabletop since they're often used to attack from such great distances.
I suspect the USMC infantry may get some sort of AT infantry add-on in the future. It'll probably come in some sort of USMC infantry specials box containing things like a LAW trooper, radioman, sharpshooter, medic, and any other support models.
I know one of the armies I'll be getting is the PLA simply because it's like a human wave, but with tons of firepower. They die fast but their basic squad can really pour on the fire. I know I have to have a small US force at least, for demos, and a MEA army for demo scenarios.
Also such units may not even appear on the tabletop since they're often used to attack from such great distances.
I suspect the USMC infantry may get some sort of AT infantry add-on in the future. It'll probably come in some sort of USMC infantry specials box containing things like a LAW trooper, radioman, sharpshooter, medic, and any other support models.
I know one of the armies I'll be getting is the PLA simply because it's like a human wave, but with tons of firepower. They die fast but their basic squad can really pour on the fire. I know I have to have a small US force at least, for demos, and a MEA army for demo scenarios.
I stand thoroughly corrected 
I meant something more mobile like for in city fighting. Like an RPG which you can carry from a bunker to a building to a ditch. Instead you have to drive around like a tank with less armor or drive a tank. Here is where I think the PLA and MEA are at an advantage.
I meant something more mobile like for in city fighting. Like an RPG which you can carry from a bunker to a building to a ditch. Instead you have to drive around like a tank with less armor or drive a tank. Here is where I think the PLA and MEA are at an advantage.
Turtle said:
Thing is, a tank is probably hard enough to kill, even by the PLA and Brits with their big shiny missiles, forget the RPG's the MEA are gonna be toting. The playtest stuff at the Towers (OK so this was back in what, early November?) had killshots being out of the damage range of the LAW the brits have and most tanks taking 4 or 5 'wounds' to kill.
Sure you can kill their infantry but then their tank just sits there with it's big gun and machine guns blowing the living crap out of your troops and all you can do is sit there and take it.
It does make for more of a 'combined arms' vibe though which may well be what they're after. From what I've seen, the US more than anyone has been developing integrated combat systems to link their forces together and this kind of thing would make it more apparent on the tabletop.
In the same way, the MEA are very 'cheap and cheerful' with numbers and enthusiasm making up what tech can't, the Brits are (hopefully) highly versatile even without support and the PLA should lack a bit in tech but can and will throw enough bodies at the wall that the last wave walks up a ramp of the fallen.
