Jump to content



Photo

Actual Tank-Based Campaigns...?


  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

#41 BaronIveagh

BaronIveagh

    Member

  • Members
  • 894 posts

Posted 21 June 2014 - 01:37 PM

FWs lengthy dissection of the Leman Russ has it as follows, and this is what we did:

 

Commander, gunner, driver, loader.  (no sponsons, we used armor skirts)

 

Driver controls the hull armament, gunner and loader the main armament, commander fights the tank and also serves as vox operator.

 

For those who do not understand what 'fights the tank' means, the commander is the only member of the crew with a clear field of view in combat and issues orders to the rest of the crew to keep from getting blown up.  This is very important in general, but particularly street fighting against orks as the party withdrew toward the Temple of the Emperor Ascendant.



#42 Magnus Grendel

Magnus Grendel

    The Empire Needs You!

  • Members
  • 1,357 posts

Posted 25 June 2014 - 01:27 AM

 

It worked pretty well. The sergeant didn't have a comrade to direct but was busy directing everyone else plus manning the pintle heavy stubber, so it all worked out fine.

 

Cool. How many tank combats did you play out? And did your players enjoy their roles within tank combat, limitations and all?

 

 

Quite a few. We played the Against the Savages mission, which worked out well - disembarking from the transport, trekking off to the refinery (they picked up the stormtroopers and had them play tank-riders, so they had someone to man the wall defences when they got there), taking the refinery and defending it.

 

We played an adapted form of the 'behind enemy lines' mission from the GM's kit, too - mostly because I wanted to do The Beast in 40k.

 

It seemed to go fairly well. The Sponson gunners are arguably more important, because the attack forces always include both battlewagons and buggies and infantry, which the heavy gunner can't effectively engage. Taking a vanquisher specifically stops him having the "anti-everything gun" and makes those heavy bolters vital for keeping you alive.

 

Also, tended to make them fight in the open every so often. Orky antitank mines are lethally powerful and blatantly obvious - but can be crept through by infantry - so sometimes they need to advance on foot to reach an objective.

 

Plus we had one big massed battle. About a dozen tanks plus one super-heavy bulling its way through the middle of the fight.



#43 BrotherFiacco

BrotherFiacco

    Member

  • Members
  • 15 posts

Posted 26 June 2014 - 09:39 AM

Perhaps as a little bit of inspiration I'll leave this here https://www.youtube....h?v=q94n3eWOWXM

 

I also advise to consider a combined arms situation between regiments from the same world.  For instance the IA Forgeworld series does depict the Death Korp as primarily siege regiments, however they also had armored and mechanized regiments as well.

I suggest this purely as taking steps toward understanding how a tank based campaign could work by simply phasing it into the game.  SO in this instance a few Player Characters might be from a mechanized Cadian regiment fighting along side PCs from a DKoK Tank regiment.  This can allow you to still incorporate all elements of the game and allow a glimpse into what problems may have to be trouble shot and if the group will actually enjoy being a purely tank based group.  

Of course this all depends on the size of the group in the first place :)



#44 Tenebrae

Tenebrae

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,004 posts

Posted 26 June 2014 - 11:49 AM

Perhaps as a little bit of inspiration I'll leave this here https://www.youtube....h?v=q94n3eWOWXM

For some odd reason, I was sure you going to link to: https://www.youtube....h?v=DGOzHI7awzI.
No clue why mind you.

Edited by Tenebrae, 26 June 2014 - 11:51 AM.


#45 Adeptus-B

Adeptus-B

    Part-Time Super Villian

  • Members
  • 1,895 posts

Posted 28 June 2014 - 09:35 AM

FWs lengthy dissection of the Leman Russ has it as follows--

 

Which specific Forge World book has the 'lengthy dissection of the Leman Russ'? Imperial Armour, I'm guessing? If so, which volume?



#46 BaronIveagh

BaronIveagh

    Member

  • Members
  • 894 posts

Posted 05 July 2014 - 06:02 AM

 
Which specific Forge World book has the 'lengthy dissection of the Leman Russ'? Imperial Armour, I'm guessing? If so, which volume?


Volume 1 covers ig. The crew roles are on pages 34-35 IIRC in 2nd Edition.

#47 Adeptus-B

Adeptus-B

    Part-Time Super Villian

  • Members
  • 1,895 posts

Posted 05 July 2014 - 04:26 PM

Cool- I'll try to track that down.



#48 Chaplain

Chaplain

    Member

  • Members
  • 183 posts

Posted 06 July 2014 - 05:05 AM

Leman Russ campaign errata with a few housrules - battle cannon reload process, turning turrets and armour-piercing rapeshells.

http://pastebin.com/6F5eRMhn

 


I am the man who arranges the blocks

#49 Benu5

Benu5

    Member

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 28 July 2014 - 12:10 AM

You could have 2-3 operators (dependent on vehicle) manning the tank and that's it. Just make it fluff that one one is the Sergeant or commander. 

 

1 PC driver, comrade hull mount.

2 PC Commander/ pintle mount,Comrade Main gunner/loader. 

3 PC Sponson 1, Comrade sponson 2. 

 

Mix and match for personal preference. Any medical needs would be taken care of by NPC's post contact. Repair taken care of by PCs and NPC Mechanicus.



#50 Adeptus-B

Adeptus-B

    Part-Time Super Villian

  • Members
  • 1,895 posts

Posted 28 July 2014 - 11:29 AM

But would players enjoy that, with only one 'character class' allowed? Like I said earlier, RPGs depend on variety to hold players' interest. -And how would you like to be the 'lucky' player stuck being 'Right Sponson Gunner'...?

 

The point of this thread isn't to find the rock-bottom minimum that a tank-based campaign can squeak by with; its to find fun options that will hold players' interest for long-term campaign gaming.



#51 Benu5

Benu5

    Member

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 28 July 2014 - 10:40 PM

Maybe with additional comrades, so there is only 2 Operator PCs each with 2 comrades (again vehicle dependent). One can pick tank ace at the first milestone to mix it up a bit (the fact that you keep comrade advances is awesome for this). The rest of the squad can be infantry supporting the tank. 

 

Gives the players variety in classes, but still would require a large player group to seem realistic (A lone Leman Russ with a Segeant and Vox Tech running around behind it would look pretty weird).

 

Ultimately, Vehicles with crews greater than 2 (or lesser, what does a sentinel operators comrade do?) are poorly implemented in Only War and so are the concepts for armored regiments. Armored regiments have a completely different structure to infantry, on that in game terms would require a completely different set of classes, or at least variants of the current choices.



#52 Tenebrae

Tenebrae

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,004 posts

Posted 29 July 2014 - 04:22 AM

(or lesser, what does a sentinel operators comrade do?)

To be perfectly honest, I see the sentinel as probably more problematic than the LRuss.

I have yet to GM with either though, so it might not be much of a problem.



#53 Adeptus-B

Adeptus-B

    Part-Time Super Villian

  • Members
  • 1,895 posts

Posted 29 July 2014 - 10:57 AM

To be perfectly honest, I see the sentinel as probably more problematic than the LRuss.

 

In a different thread someone suggested that a Sentinel Operator's Comrade runs along beside the Sentinel, like a loyal dog...

 

Ultimately, Vehicles with crews greater than 2 (or lesser, what does a sentinel operators comrade do?) are poorly implemented in Only War and so are the concepts for armored regiments.

 

I absolutely agree, which is why I started this thread. I think the big discrepancy between the number of people who say they want to play a tank-based campaign vs. the number of people who actually do it is at least in part due to the lack of guidelines on how it would work in actual play. Hopefully this discussion will stir up some useful info for bridging the gap between the vague vehicle rules and the necessary elements of an ongoing tank-based campaign.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS