I'd like to see a unit-by-unit, "D&D style" method for resolving initiative that takes into account the unit type and unit quality. Instead of each side rolling initiative, each unit should roll initiative according to the following formula: Initiative= 2d6 + (10 -- piloting skill) + (unit type modifier) + (global bonuses or penalties) Unit-Type Modifiers: +1 for vehicles. +2 for BattleMechs and Aereospace Fighters (neurohelmets). Global Bonus: various equipment, battle variables, and commander quality might modify this score. Each unit rolls off each round and gets a score. The score is written on a notecard or denoted next to the model somehow. Lowest moves first. In case several units have the same score, a one-die roll off is made for each unit, the lowest going first. It is a bit more time consuming, but this method or something like it would solve a lot of problems.
this is an interesting idea, but only practical for small unit engagements of 10 units or less per side. I usually play battalion level engagements using standard rules (30-50 units per side). breaking up the initiative this far is not going to work. that's an hour to determine the order of engaging units.
we removed the 'initiative sink'. by using commanders initiative, each side rolls initiative. however, in a lance on lance match, the commander that lost initiative moves the entire lance. the significant difference from IGYG, both players complete movement and then both players complete all attacks, but damage is not assessed for the turn until the end phase. IGYG format, player A moves everything, then completes all attacks and then removes all damaged/destroyed targets - BEFORE player B has had an opportunity to do anything.
So you destroyed the point of running large body count lists to cater to the already op elite lists? I’m all for the front loaded initiative Alternate rule to reduce the advantage of winning initiative, but yeah man, Clan basically is gonna usually lose getting to be the final movement cus you have far fewer much stronger units. Space magic literally designed to be so op it could drive boom and model sales wasn’t enough advantage for you? You also have to cheese initiative to favor clans?
Have you seen the Mercs KS? In the new Mercs boxset, with the option of using newly-included battlefield support cards for all non-mechs (instead of traditional record sheets), all battlefield support units move before all mechs move. Mechs are supposed to rule the battlefield.
its a neat way of introducing combined arms in classic without the full rules. i liken them to NPC stat blocks in tabletop RPGs. you could always field 'hero' units later using a full record sheet with Total Warfare rules. its only battle armour that I still prefer TW rules for. they seem too abstracted in the new asset rules for my liking
I've seen this in action. I use combination military in my games. I force the enemy to move more then I do, often granting me a better fire position. We have worked on multiple systems and found a few fixes. Great video my guy.
My group uses formation movement, it simplifies everything so much. Then again, we also have a unit cap (based on PV/BV) so we do not have to deal with anybody attempting to “flood the table” with mass infantry/small vehicles.
RAW: Techmanual: pg 314: Force size: Force modifier = (S ÷ L) + (L ÷ S) - 1 : The side with more units (Initiative sinks) pays more BV. 'Constructing a Battle Force' subsection 'Force size'.
The force size modifier was removed from the game years ago. It is no longer official in any way, which is why you will not find it in the recent/current rule books.
@@RexfelisLXIX While I can think of a great number of reasons, I would say the most likely is to streamline tournament play. Since the result can vary, depending how many units each player deploys, it means games can begin sooner rather than taking time trying to calculate that equation at the beginning of each game. Personally, I think it not existing promotes healthier and more varied gameplay. It means nobody is trying to “game the system” by “going Lyran” and attempting to scum their way through by getting BV bonuses because they just took two fat assaults.
Ever tried using chits or cards to determine initiatives for each unit? I would love to hear your battle report and your implementations of the system. Many ways to do it
That just seems super cheesy, IS will always have the adv vs clan. I know youre talking about RAW, but i like the idea of "move as battle groups" sorta how a real military organization would move if it was on a table top. Ie: you have a goblin holding a squad of infantry and a patton tank. Labeled as a battle group the payton supports and covers the tranport they should all manuver in conjunction. A battle group 3x warriors should manuver all together.
I really like taking a Clan supernova versus an introtech Inner Sphere mech company. Those elementals are absolutely necessary as initiative sinks
I like taking the role of a tank commander and just bringing as many tanks as possible
What we did was that 3 infantry platoon stands ( a company) goes at the same time and vehicles go in lances
I'd like to see a unit-by-unit, "D&D style" method for resolving initiative that takes into account the unit type and unit quality. Instead of each side rolling initiative, each unit should roll initiative according to the following formula:
Initiative= 2d6 + (10 -- piloting skill) + (unit type modifier) + (global bonuses or penalties)
Unit-Type Modifiers: +1 for vehicles. +2 for BattleMechs and Aereospace Fighters (neurohelmets).
Global Bonus: various equipment, battle variables, and commander quality might modify this score.
Each unit rolls off each round and gets a score. The score is written on a notecard or denoted next to the model somehow. Lowest moves first. In case several units have the same score, a one-die roll off is made for each unit, the lowest going first.
It is a bit more time consuming, but this method or something like it would solve a lot of problems.
this is an interesting idea, but only practical for small unit engagements of 10 units or less per side.
I usually play battalion level engagements using standard rules (30-50 units per side). breaking up the initiative this far is not going to work. that's an hour to determine the order of engaging units.
we removed the 'initiative sink'.
by using commanders initiative, each side rolls initiative. however, in a lance on lance match, the commander that lost initiative moves the entire lance.
the significant difference from IGYG, both players complete movement and then both players complete all attacks, but damage is not assessed for the turn until the end phase.
IGYG format, player A moves everything, then completes all attacks and then removes all damaged/destroyed targets - BEFORE player B has had an opportunity to do anything.
So you destroyed the point of running large body count lists to cater to the already op elite lists?
I’m all for the front loaded initiative Alternate rule to reduce the advantage of winning initiative, but yeah man, Clan basically is gonna usually lose getting to be the final movement cus you have far fewer much stronger units.
Space magic literally designed to be so op it could drive boom and model sales wasn’t enough advantage for you? You also have to cheese initiative to favor clans?
Have you seen the Mercs KS? In the new Mercs boxset, with the option of using newly-included battlefield support cards for all non-mechs (instead of traditional record sheets), all battlefield support units move before all mechs move. Mechs are supposed to rule the battlefield.
Ive only played a handful with the new "vehicle quickplay" rules, but have really enjoyed how they incorporate.
It leaves out a lot of units.
its a neat way of introducing combined arms in classic without the full rules. i liken them to NPC stat blocks in tabletop RPGs. you could always field 'hero' units later using a full record sheet with Total Warfare rules. its only battle armour that I still prefer TW rules for. they seem too abstracted in the new asset rules for my liking
I luv small cheap units, makes more sense for mercs
And backwater planets.
I've seen this in action. I use combination military in my games. I force the enemy to move more then I do, often granting me a better fire position. We have worked on multiple systems and found a few fixes.
Great video my guy.
My group uses formation movement, it simplifies everything so much. Then again, we also have a unit cap (based on PV/BV) so we do not have to deal with anybody attempting to “flood the table” with mass infantry/small vehicles.
RAW: Techmanual: pg 314: Force size: Force modifier = (S ÷ L) + (L ÷ S) - 1 : The side with more units (Initiative sinks) pays more BV. 'Constructing a Battle Force' subsection 'Force size'.
I looked for this immediately, but p315 is the BV calculation for a dropship. This is a very important rule. What printing has it on p315???
@@russellorr6720 First printing 2007. It is under 'Constructing a Battle Force' subsection 'Force size'.
The force size modifier was removed from the game years ago. It is no longer official in any way, which is why you will not find it in the recent/current rule books.
@@LiberalApplicationOfThud I wonder why.
@@RexfelisLXIX While I can think of a great number of reasons, I would say the most likely is to streamline tournament play. Since the result can vary, depending how many units each player deploys, it means games can begin sooner rather than taking time trying to calculate that equation at the beginning of each game.
Personally, I think it not existing promotes healthier and more varied gameplay. It means nobody is trying to “game the system” by “going Lyran” and attempting to scum their way through by getting BV bonuses because they just took two fat assaults.
Ever tried using chits or cards to determine initiatives for each unit? I would love to hear your battle report and your implementations of the system. Many ways to do it
That just seems super cheesy, IS will always have the adv vs clan. I know youre talking about RAW, but i like the idea of "move as battle groups" sorta how a real military organization would move if it was on a table top. Ie: you have a goblin holding a squad of infantry and a patton tank. Labeled as a battle group the payton supports and covers the tranport they should all manuver in conjunction. A battle group 3x warriors should manuver all together.
Homebrew rules is also why & where all the 'silly' new tech came from as well as all a lot of LAM hate came from.