Jump to content



Photo

Kampfaffen und Untertoten: An unbeatable combo?


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 Warboss Krag

Warboss Krag

    Member

  • Members
  • 379 posts

Posted 17 May 2012 - 08:24 PM

I've been playing Germans, mostly, in my Warfare games. In the course of play, I've come upon the nigh-unbeatable combo of using gorillas and zombies; with support, those are a devastating combo. I've also played Americans, while teaching others to play, and that off-beat combo works perfectly well against me. My question is this: How do I beat the zombie/ape combo? I invite and solicit commentary from one and all!



#2 caecitas

caecitas

    Member

  • Members
  • 180 posts

Posted 17 May 2012 - 08:42 PM

i cant say ive had to take on an ape/zombie combo, but i do regually face zombie platoons.

My best advice vs any unit that fast is to be sure to use your command wisely - try to get as many shots off as humanly possible before they close. Remember that once a unit is in close combat range, should it attack the enemy unit it can react with more close combat attacks, so often its best to shoot at a unit in close combat with another unit.

spacing is vital, do not be afraid to screen your high damage output troops and make the zombies come to you squad at a time.



#3 Azrell

Azrell

    Member

  • Members
  • 113 posts

Posted 17 May 2012 - 10:59 PM

 My zombies have not landed at my LGS *should be here any day now, but iv been using the "fail safe" order to spawn a few here and there and they seem to run off in 1s or 2s and beat face on a level all there own. 



#4 Hatamoto

Hatamoto

    Member

  • Members
  • 58 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 12:29 AM

 so how are you supposed to get enough shots in with the 16" BB-gun equipment?



#5 Warboss Krag

Warboss Krag

    Member

  • Members
  • 379 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 12:37 AM

I should add that we do play with the 1/4 table area of cover rule, and I insist that all woods are opaque. We can actually look out of the gaming store windows and see modest foliage that can't be seen through. This means that close combat units - including the Allied jump troops - actually have the opportunity to work in close.

Not that it matters with the aforementioned 16" BB gun range. What's up with that?



#6 Warboss Krag

Warboss Krag

    Member

  • Members
  • 379 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 01:12 AM

Stung by the range question, I looked through my set of Tactics cards for their weapon ranges. Some of the weapons got nerfed somewhat - the German MG and the .50 cal lost damage against armor 3 and 4 troops; I wonder why. And the Mickey's 75mm got taken down a peg; it had been as deadly as a whole Nebelwerfer barrage! That one deserved to be down-graded.

But the ranges definitely got lowered. Given a 6" increment for every tile square - this is extrapolated from movement rates, as well as the ranges on shotguns, flamethrowers, sniper rifles, and tank weapons - then the Tactics range of 4, used by almost every rifle and MG, should translate to a Warfare range of 24". The bazooka/panzerschreck range of 3 becomes 18", and the panzerfaust 2 becomes 12". These would seem to be reasonable, and would give darned good reasons why apes and zombies don't suppress, and why Allied jump troops are wearing armor 3: In order to allow these units to survive long enough to make it into close combat.

This leaves me wondering just why weapon ranges were lowered, and it also leaves me wondering if it didn't have something to do with Andy Chambers' favored Reaction rule. Since it was brought over almost unaltered from Starship Troopers, with its 12" trigger zone, it wouldn't work as well with longer weapon ranges. Of course, there could have been a straight-up Overwatch rule put in - a Command order, which would allow a unit to fire, at full range, at any one enemy unit during that enemy unit's activation - that would make for a lot fewer reactions… The reaction rule, as written, made a lot more sense with Cap Troopers, who could jump away from enemies scurrying their direction. It doesn't make as much sense when someone's shooting at you.



#7 Shadow4ce

Shadow4ce

    Member

  • Members
  • 645 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 04:05 AM

*putonalliedgeneralshat*

I recommend using cheap screening forces spaced out to force the BlutKreuz Abominations to stop and eat them. Once the assaulting critter wave breaks on the mostly destroyed meat-shield-wall, open up with the two BBQ squads and Flame Walkers strategically placed 3-4" behind. Sustained attacks with Flamethrowers is yummy. And I hear US troops of that era always had Hershey bars, all you need to bring now are graham crackers and marshmallows. 

 

*putaxisfieldmarshalshatbackon*

I'm not going to tell you how I counter my counter. 



#8 Dcal12

Dcal12

    Member

  • Members
  • 410 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 04:13 AM

Warboss Krag said:

I should add that we do play with the 1/4 table area of cover rule, and I insist that all woods are opaque. We can actually look out of the gaming store windows and see modest foliage that can't be seen through. This means that close combat units - including the Allied jump troops - actually have the opportunity to work in close.

Not that it matters with the aforementioned 16" BB gun range. What's up with that?

Warboss Krag said:

I should add that we do play with the 1/4 table area of cover rule, and I insist that all woods are opaque. We can actually look out of the gaming store windows and see modest foliage that can't be seen through. This means that close combat units - including the Allied jump troops - actually have the opportunity to work in close.

Not that it matters with the aforementioned 16" BB gun range. What's up with that?

 

I am just curious on how much of the terrain in the 1/4 table cover area is the opaque woods you insist on and how much is craters and items similiar to that?  Craters would not help the Zombies at all.

And whereas you insist on woods being opaque because you look out the window in the spring and can't see through, what about woods in the winter months with minimum foliage. 

Do you also allow Competitive Terrain setup?  If so and I was fighting against you, I would be placing woods near the edge of the battlefield and other terrain that can be fired through like craters in the center.  That would help with my longer ranged weapons and artillery. 

Are you using the battlebuilder?

 



#9 Warboss Krag

Warboss Krag

    Member

  • Members
  • 379 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 05:32 AM

Yes, we use battlebuilder. Although we also try to make the battlefield look real, like WWII, and not like No-Man's Land; that was the last War To End All Wars. Also, try going out to the woods, if you have any near-by, in the winter; you'll see that the so-called 'minimum foliage' is pretty thick, thanks to leafless cover stems and so on near the ground. And that doesn't even cover evergreens. (I live near a lot of woods; as a transport center, Springfield MO resembles a wooded suburb more than an urban area.)

And even if the field is clear, like steppes in winter, the low weapon ranges still favor zombies.



#10 Shadow4ce

Shadow4ce

    Member

  • Members
  • 645 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 05:58 AM

Warboss Krag said:

Yes, we use battlebuilder. Although we also try to make the battlefield look real, like WWII, and not like No-Man's Land; that was the last War To End All Wars. Also, try going out to the woods, if you have any near-by, in the winter; you'll see that the so-called 'minimum foliage' is pretty thick, thanks to leafless cover stems and so on near the ground. And that doesn't even cover evergreens. (I live near a lot of woods; as a transport center, Springfield MO resembles a wooded suburb more than an urban area.)

And even if the field is clear, like steppes in winter, the low weapon ranges still favor zombies.

 

I spent a winter and spring in Springfield, MO back in the mid-80s. Krag is correct, dense foliage areas, especially near Battlefield or was it Battlecreek?  The place just outside Springfield where a civil war battle was fought. 

 

PS Springfield, MO, unless things have changed, has the best Mass Transit bus system in America. Rarely took more than one transfer or more than 30 minutes to get anywhere in the city. Very efficient. 



#11 Dcal12

Dcal12

    Member

  • Members
  • 410 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 06:17 AM

I spent enough time in Wisconsin snowmobiling to know what woods look like in the winter. 

I would like to go up against your unbeatable combo with Steel Rain, Wildfire, also take Additional Resources so my 220mm Long Tom has a better chance of hitting each turn.  Maybe a sniper team, couple platoons of BBQ squads.  I like the idea of sacrificing a couple cheap platoons out front to give my other units more time.  Fire Steel Rain direct so I can fire both the Petard and Rocket system everyturn.  Give up sustain fire to reload, but that should be ok.



#12 Guidebot

Guidebot

    Member

  • Members
  • 17 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 06:22 AM

I think that the weapon ranges were lowered to reflect the new reaction mechanic, personally.

And, on topic, though I play Axis I use a much more standard Sturmgrenadiere platoon; no zombies for me!



#13 Hatamoto

Hatamoto

    Member

  • Members
  • 58 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 10:00 AM

 so a reaction mechanic that is rarely put to use because of pre measuring and a bunch of rules that doesnt allow it turned the guns into BB? why would the reaction range have to be 12" in the 1st place? it should be longer along with weapon ranges, or as someone mentioned, an overwatch option would have been cool. I am truly upset about the warhammer 40kish cheese strategy surfacing here.. demand more of this game dammit, it could become special (in a couple of editions)



#14 Shadow4ce

Shadow4ce

    Member

  • Members
  • 645 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 10:43 AM

 I think it's something special now. And the games I've played with longer reaction ranges turn into dice fests with no movement, as both sides hunker in cover on their board edges. 



#15 Warboss Krag

Warboss Krag

    Member

  • Members
  • 379 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 10:52 AM

We tend to have strong undergrowth here in Missouri, the sort of stuff that truly makes going through the woods Difficult Terrain, unless you're on a path. Even in winter, although all you're left with is stems and branches.

Our bus system is still efficient, I guess. We don't have enough of it, because it's run by our City Utilities, a quasi-independent monopoly run by professional business execs who think everything is for profits only, despite being awarded a public monopoly and public funding.

As for longer ranges turning into snipe-fests, that's why you have terrain you can't see through. The average rifle in WWII was quite accurate over 400m, and there were a lot of machineguns to boot, and yet there were still close encounters and skirmishes. Imagine. (Ever been to Shiloh? Shudder.)

Interesting, trying to handle a rush army with artillery. I'll have to try it. And as for taking the re-roll on the 22cm artillery, every time, man! I don't consider that an option!

 



#16 Snowshadow

Snowshadow

    Member

  • Members
  • 120 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 11:49 AM

 I don't think that an attack reaction at weapon range would be all that bad. Most weapon systems are 16" or under anyway so it wouldn't change a whole lot. it would just unlock the potential for sniper/big gun duels.



#17 Shadow4ce

Shadow4ce

    Member

  • Members
  • 645 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 11:51 AM

 Capable of firing 400 meters, absolutely. Actually fired at enemies 400 meters away, even through open terrain?  Only snipers that I'm aware of. Their Sgt. would kick their butts for wasting ammo. 

 

Having been in real firefights, knowing ammo is precious, I can tell you, survivors react first to the nearest threat, and professional survivors only shoot at what they are confident they can hit.  Having a reaction range more than 10-15" allows for some pretty unrealistic gamesmanship manipulation, where players start to use the Reaction rules to attack stuff that isn't nearly as big a threat to them as other, closer stuff, but will help insure a victory. These are targets that the command phase is for, not the unit phase, and more accurately reflects real-life tactics, doctrine, and survival instincts. 

12" reaction range is not only a good decision from a game standpoint, it makes good sense from an alternate reality weapons ranges based reality standpoint. 

Combat shooting is not target shooting!  In combat, the targets move in unpredictable ways, do outrageous things, and have the temerity to actually shoot back!



#18 Warboss Krag

Warboss Krag

    Member

  • Members
  • 379 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 02:45 PM

Hmm, perhaps for reaction ranges. I really miss the ability to deny areas with weapons specifically meant to fire at long ranges - heavy machineguns, meaning those with mounts, extra barrels, lots of ammo, and a gun crew. For them, either an overwatch action or a specifically designed area sweep action would be useful (there's actually a decent one of the latter in the 40K RPGs).



#19 Shadow4ce

Shadow4ce

    Member

  • Members
  • 645 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 07:00 PM

 That, I could buy into. One of the cooler Overwatch/long-range suppression systems I've seen is in a little 5-on-5 skirmish game called MERCS. Not sure what it'd do to this system, but some day I'll probably get a few buddies who know that system and toy with it and see. 



#20 Hatamoto

Hatamoto

    Member

  • Members
  • 58 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 07:05 PM

 use terrain if you dont want to get shot to peices, its only logical.. there are many rules you can add to put some strategy into that move action, how you use cover, running hunkered down etc. wh40k had penalties for shooters shooting at targets moving in and out of cover and between cover pieces. why is it always asumed that ranged combat has to mean static combat? it sure as hell doesnt in infinity.






© 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