Jump to content



Photo

Why no love for Reconnissance and Hunter-Killer?


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 CaptainTrek

CaptainTrek

    Member

  • Members
  • 36 posts

Posted 01 August 2012 - 01:17 AM

Is it just me, or do both the Reconnissance and Hunter-Killer regiment types both seem a little underpowered for three points? Apparently, 1 point is enough to add Chimeras to a standard infantry regiment that's using lasguns, flak armour and grenades, but if you want it to be Sentinals or Hellhounds instead your foot soldiers have to take a downgradea and make due with laspistols and flak vests that can only be re-couped (and then only in part) by spending some of those 30 Additional Equipment points…

Not only does it not seem worth taking either of these Regiment types for three points, but it doesn't seem to make logical sense for them to be deployed like this either. Now, I can understand not giving lasguns or proper body armour to tank crews, but why on Holy Terra would you ask a squad of infantry supported by a walker to go on a search-and-destroy or protracted scouting mission equipped only with pistols and light armour? Shouldn't these guys AT LEAST get a similar package to Light Infantry? Seems like that'd be more sensible and reasonably balanced at three points…



#2 boooh

boooh

    Member

  • Members
  • 36 posts

Posted 01 August 2012 - 05:12 AM

Thats the reason why we, after our droop trop regiment got totally busted, made in our actuall round an multipurpose Regiment (basicly a Line Infantry Regiment ) wich is able to perform almost any mission from other regiments. (we just get a proper verhicle for the mission no matter if it´s a Tauros, Chimera, Hellhound or other)



#3 Cannonball

Cannonball

    Member

  • Members
  • 56 posts

Posted 26 August 2012 - 03:02 AM

I agree entirely. When you compare Mechanised Infantry to both Recon and HK regiments, both the latter come up short. My solution is to make them both light infantry upgrades. Recon and HK regiments get a flak vest, a helmet and las carbines. The HK regiment also gets a supply of greandes (two frag, two something else - haven't decided). The Recon regiment gets no grenades because it comes equipped with magnoculars by default.

It is my belief that this balances both the Recon and the HK regiment with the other regiment options. And it allows the regiments to actually take the Sentinel and not feel completely naked. Or to take the Chimera and not feel stupendously jealous at their Mechanised Infantry counterparts.



#4 Plushy

Plushy

    Member

  • Members
  • 811 posts

Posted 26 August 2012 - 08:51 AM

 I really think Hunter-Killer would make more sense if the Tauros was in the book, and was an option for them.


My apologies to anyone I offend; FFG staff, playtesters, and forum users alike. 

 

Please check out my Dark Heresy to Only War conversion! You can find it on the main Only War forum. I'm always looking for more people to playtest it!


#5 TCBC Freak

TCBC Freak

    Member

  • Members
  • 222 posts

Posted 26 August 2012 - 09:41 AM

I still think the HK should get one Sentinel per member, or Hellhound per squad, since they all start with Operator (Surface). And like Rough Rider regiments there are full regiments of Sentinel squads they are just never fielded at that strength but spread out into other regiments instead. That would give the same logic for little armor and just a pistol like the Armored Core and they should have a no abhuman/psyker (in a way the x-ing of those three options is the reason it's only 3 points when everyone can get a Sentinel).

But then again I'm reminded of the Table Top were you could have three squads of up three Sentinels if you want (and armed with Lascannons… oh boy, pricey, but talk about Hunter Killers!) and they operated as a unit in and of themselves.

By the way I would just give Recon the Light infantry weapon and armor and call that a day as was suggested above.


I wish I lived around people who actullay played games instead of just calling themselves gamers....


#6 Kasatka

Kasatka

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,050 posts

Posted 28 August 2012 - 10:31 PM

Edit - double post, see below.


Only the insane have strength enough to prosper.

Only those that prosper may truly judge what is sane.


#7 Kasatka

Kasatka

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,050 posts

Posted 28 August 2012 - 10:32 PM

 I think one sentinel per squad member is a bit much as that would include the comrades in the squad too. However 1 sentinel per 2 player characters could work, as seen in a lot of the guard artwork where you have a small number of light infantry moving ahead of a sentinel, which is essentially there to provide mobile heavy firepower instead of to mechanize the entire unit. This would equate to 2 to 3 sentinels in an average sized game (i take 4 to 6 players to be average), and you still have the comrades as well.


Only the insane have strength enough to prosper.

Only those that prosper may truly judge what is sane.


#8 Musclewizard

Musclewizard

    Member

  • Members
  • 320 posts

Posted 30 August 2012 - 02:07 AM

Kasatka said:

 I think one sentinel per squad member is a bit much as that would include the comrades in the squad too. However 1 sentinel per 2 player characters could work, as seen in a lot of the guard artwork where you have a small number of light infantry moving ahead of a sentinel, which is essentially there to provide mobile heavy firepower instead of to mechanize the entire unit. This would equate to 2 to 3 sentinels in an average sized game (i take 4 to 6 players to be average), and you still have the comrades as well.

Something along those lines would probably be reasonable. 1 sentinel per X player characters seems like a good fit in my opinion.

The problem with sentinels is that the Comrades get left out one way or another so I think its up to the GM and the players to decide how many sentinels the squad gets / needs / wants.

If the squad consists of a Heavy Gunner, a Comissar, a Ratling Sniper and a Weapon specialist giving the Comissar and the Ratling each their own Sentinel is probably not the best idea both from a setting standpoint and from a player standpoint.

Maybe the Hunter-Killer and Reconnissance texts should be rewritten to allow for additional sentinels with the upper limited decided by the GM with at least one being avaiable to the squad regardles.



#9 CaptainTrek

CaptainTrek

    Member

  • Members
  • 36 posts

Posted 06 September 2012 - 01:00 PM

For me personally I'd probably just go with what Cannonball said, though my personal preference as a GM would be to use Flak Jackets rather than Flak Vests. Why? Because whenever my players go into battle with any part unarmoured, that part suddenly becomes magnetised and starts attracting every last incoming bullet and strike. It's uncanny… And yeah, much of what they're facing's going to have enough pen to get through the armour anyway, but still…

As for the grenades, I'd probably give the scouts smoke grenades in addition to their magnoculars (since, y'know, it makes sense for scouts to be able to cover themselves over with a smoke screen). Whilst it's boring, HK's would probably just get Kraks…






© 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