Xenos Rampant is coming!

[Hobgoblin]

IIRC you can only 'firefight' up to your max range - not the length of the table.  So there is a way to stand off and get a couple shots in without earning return fire.

I initially assumed that was the rule, but when I checked mid-game first time round, that didn't seem to be the case. I then went back and had a scan, and there's nothing in the sections on Shooting, Firefight and Weapon Ranges (pages 59-61) that rules out Firefight at extreme range. Nor is there any such prohibition in the individual Firefight sections in the troop descriptions. So I think all troop types with Firefight can fight back at extreme range.

[Storm Wolf]

I am also pretty sure that the rules state that firefight can only be carried out if the range is within your units normal range band.

P59 under shooting it states
If your unit is within the targets units own shoot value range, they may declare a Firefight reaction if it has the firefight special rule, which is successful on an activation test of 7+.

This makes it more complicated because you could potentially shoot from 48" if it was artillery upgraded??? I think it should mean if your unit is within its own shoot value range (more common sense )

Glen

[DivisMal]

Very interested in this discussion. I have only read the book and built lists until now. From Hobgoblin’s experience, though, I think I‘ll use the tuned down firefight rules.
What irks me a little though is that the tuning down of unit dice might create models invincible to certain units.
Let’s see how it plays.

[Hobgoblin]

I am also pretty sure that the rules state that firefight can only be carried out if the range is within your units normal range band.

P59 under shooting it states
If your unit is within the targets units own shoot value range, they may declare a Firefight reaction if it has the firefight special rule, which is successful on an activation test of 7+.

Aha - yes, you and Warren are quite right! I must have just been parsing "Shoot Value range" as "range" when I read it the second time! No excuses, either, because the second paragraph of that section makes a clear distinction between "Shoot Value range" and "extreme range".  Thanks!

This makes it more complicated because you could potentially shoot from 48" if it was artillery upgraded??? I think it should mean if your unit is within its own shoot value range (more common sense )

Well, the upgrade does explicitly change the Shoot Value, so if one Support Infantry unit with Artillery shoots at another, there's definitely Firefight potential.

I'm now itching to get another game in to see if that addresses some of my concerns about Elite Infantry. In our game the other week, it would certainly have meant that the Support Infantry unit would have survived for at least another turn.

[Hobgoblin]

Hmm, so a cagey player using a bunch of lower value units might be able to use one to draw the firefight return fire from the elites, then pile on fire from a couple higher value units without those being at risk of return fire. Given the armour value of elites, the lower value troops might still fail to cause damage, though.

Yes, that's definitely a tactical element that the book calls out explicitly. And it adds a nice risk/reward element because the lowest-value troops don't get Shoot as a free action (so there's a potential turn-ending roll on it). So if you use Rabble, Light Infantry or Recon Infantry to draw the fire of opposing Elites, there's a chance that your plan will go awry.

And yes - if you used a 1-point unit to fire on the Elites, they might well get destroyed by Firefight. You would then be able to take free actions to shoot with as many Heavy Infantry as you had with line of sight, with no risk of Firefight, but you'd need a bit of luck to cause any damage (and a fair bit of luck if the Heavy Infantry weren't upgraded).

I should say, though, that my point about the Elite Infantry profile isn't that it models space marines/sardaukar/whatever poorly - it does a great job of that! It's that they seem a little undercosted. But I might well have been getting more wrong than just the Firefight range! 

[Hobgoblin]

What irks me a little though is that the tuning down of unit dice might create models invincible to certain units.

Do you mean when a unit goes to half strength - as in the example I brought up earlier of the Support Infantry being unable to damage the Fighting Vehicle after the former lost half its strength points? I thought of a potential upgrade for Support Infantry that might fix that (for the cannon-and-crew type of unit that I was fielding):

• Crewed weapon (+2 points per unit): This unit represents a powerful weapon that retains its full destructive potential after the loss of crew members but becomes more difficult to operate. When the unit is reduced to half strength, it continues to use 10 dice for Shoot actions but loses both the Firefight special rule and its free Shoot activation (the unit now requires 7+ to fire).

That would allow big guns to continue to pack a real punch, but with added tension as the remaining crew struggle to load and fire.

[DivisMal]

Do you mean when a unit goes to half strength - as in the example I brought up earlier of the Support Infantry being unable to damage the Fighting Vehicle after the former lost half its strength points? I thought of a potential upgrade for Support Infantry that might fix that (for the cannon-and-crew type of unit that I was fielding):

• Crewed weapon (+2 points per unit): This unit represents a powerful weapon that retains its full destructive potential after the loss of crew members but becomes more difficult to operate. When the unit is reduced to half strength, it continues to use 10 dice for Shoot actions but loses both the Firefight special rule and its free Shoot activation (the unit now requires 7+ to fire).

That would allow big guns to continue to pack a real punch, but with added tension as the remaining crew struggle to load and fire.

Yeah, that’s the one I was referring to, and it reminded me of all those monsters and warmachines who were immune to certain weapons. I’ll have to see.
The upgrade for the support gun makes sense, but any other unit below half starting strength will have a difficult time to damage vehicles (or won’t be able to, at all) - right?

[Hobgoblin]

The upgrade for the support gun makes sense, but any other unit below half starting strength will have a difficult time to damage vehicles (or won’t be able to, at all) - right?

Yes, that's right - unless they have the heavy-weapons, armour-piercing or anti-tank upgrades. Most non-Elite units struggle to damage Fighting Vehicles at full strength (a normal Light or Heavy Infantry unit needs six 6s out of 10 dice, for example), which feels right, but I wonder if this is an area where the switch from 12/6 to 10/5 has cut out a remote possibility that would have been more fun. (Once every so often, someone will throw six 6s ...)

I'm hoping to fit in another game today; one thing I'm interested to see is how the Xenomorph units play out with the 10/5 dice. I'm also keen to play a game with no Elite Infantry.

[DivisMal]

Yes, that's right - unless they have the heavy-weapons, armour-piercing or anti-tank upgrades. Most non-Elite units struggle to damage Fighting Vehicles at full strength (a normal Light or Heavy Infantry unit needs six 6s out of 10 dice, for example), which feels right, but I wonder if this is an area where the switch from 12/6 to 10/5 has cut out a remote possibility that would have been more fun. (Once every so often, someone will throw six 6s ...)

I'm hoping to fit in another game today; one thing I'm interested to see is how the Xenomorph units play out with the 10/5 dice. I'm also keen to play a game with no Elite Infantry.

Yeah. That was what I was thinking, too. It’s just a minor detail, as you rarely roll 6 hits, but it’s there. Further more, iirc, in Dragon Rampant no unit had an Armor >4.
In a way, I am okay with it, certain units should not be Tank killers,  but then, I read about actual tank battles and think, well there should me a very slight chance, no matter how battered a unit is, there’s always that guy hiding ina foxhole and attempting to place a grenade at a vulnerable spot.

[religon]

I've gotten to play 4 games with a variety of armies. (I have long played DR.)

The Elite Infantry does feel a little undercost. I have been playing the units under 50% Strength roll 6d6 rather than 5d6 as I prefer a little more grit for the wounded units and I think it benefits the small units more than the large units. Recon Infantry are really garbage with their risky activation numbers.

The scenarios are all over the place in balance. Alpha is just a straight line battle and balanced by definition. Golf is badly designed... the defender simply runs hoping not to miss too many activation tests. It needs to be reworked. Lima is also rather poor. The Defenders just bolt for the exits.

The balance of a 24 pt. Xenos Rampant army vs. a tank, 2 elite space marines and a Increased Hvy. Infantry is excellent. I would consider toning down the Wild Charge from 5+ to 6+ to make a slightly more tactical game with dissimilar foes.

[fred]

I see what you mean about scenario Golf. The defender deploys after the Attacker and 24” away, and then only has to run 18” to get off the table.

Do you mean Lima, that is the defend against infinite attackers - so I don’t think running is an option

[religon]

Do you mean Lima, that is the defend against infinite attackers - so I don’t think running is an option

After rereading, you seem to be right. The phrase "break open the pocket so that they can escape," the VP conditions balance well a fleeing Defender and the Attackers surrounding the Defenders suggested breakout was an option. The game I played had all the Defenders with "Wild Charge" which changed the game before it started.

The best strategy for the Attackers, if breakout is not an option, is to concentrate forces to benefit from the Commander.

The infinite Attackers reinforce very slowly. It is also unclear if a Move activation is required to reenter the fray and how close to an enemy they may deploy. I played that no roll was required and the only reinforcing unit came back on the last turn and was unable to act.

[fred]

I read the VP awards to work out what was awarded, and skipped the narrative! Sounds like if the defender can hold out for 6 or so turns they have a fair chance of winning.

I’m just starting to get my head around the unit profiles and the various special rules to work out stat lines for the models I have. My initial thought is that the basic profiles are quite cheap, but the special rules quickly rack up the points!

[Hobgoblin]

I’m just starting to get my head around the unit profiles and the various special rules to work out stat lines for the models I have. My initial thought is that the basic profiles are quite cheap, but the special rules quickly rack up the points!

It occurred to me that the undercosting of Elite Infantry that we've picked up in our first couple of games has quite a bit to do with this. Unlike many other games (e.g. Song of Arthur and Merlin!), the Rampant series doesn't adjust upgrade costs according to the basic troop cost. That doesn't much matter in Lion or Dragon Rampant, where starting unit costs are in a fairly tight band (4-6 points for most 'serious' units), but it makes quite a difference in Xenos Rampant, where the starting ranges for mainstream units vary much more widely.

For example, Heavy Infantry cost 2 points per unit and Elite Infantry 6. If you give the Heavy Weapons upgrade to both units, they cost 4 and 8, respectively. And if you then add Armour Piercing, they cost 5 and 9. So, in effect, the Elite Infantry unit gets cheaper relative to the Heavy Infantry unit the more you soup both up - from three times as expensive to less than twice. That would suggest that the Heavy Infantry have become more powerful relative to the Elite Infantry, but I don't think that's the case.

Through those upgrades, the Heavy Infantry has got to a situation where it will often cause one casualty among the Elites per round of fire (a roll of 6 is needed for a hit; Amour Piercing means only three hits are required for a kill; and Heavy Weapons mean that 6s are doubled). That's certainly an improvement on requiring four 6s on 10 dice and typically causing no casualties.

Meanwhile, though, the Elite Infantry unit has gone from typically causing one casualty with a decent chance of a second (on a slightly better-than-average roll of six 4s, 5s or 6s) to typically causing three casualties (On a typical 10-dice roll, five dice will cause hits, and you'd expect at least one six, doubled by Heavy Weapons. So, with Armour Piercing, that's six hits and three strength points gone.).

So, an tit-for-tat exchange of fire between those units would, with the most probable number of hits on each roll, lead to the Heavy Infantry being wiped out and the Elite Infantry still being above half-strength. On top of that, the Elite Infantry unit will typically cause two casualties at extreme range and take none (unless the Heavy Infantry player rolls four sixes, in which case the Elites will take two).

That's where I see the points being a bit wonky compared with other Rampant games, where you generally "get what you pay for" in gains relative to other units (as in my example above about upgrading Bellicose Foot with Shiny Armour).

I don't have much of a mathematic brain (as the above back-of-envelope calculations probably show!), but I wonder if better balance might be achieved by (a) increasing Elite Foot to 8 points and/or (b) reducing upgrade costs for non-Elite units (e.g. Heavy Weapons for +1).

[jon_1066]

Recon with fire support look like a good match for an elite unit.  6 points, hit on a 4+ anywhere in sight but can’t be targeted over 12”