Powered Armor Doctrine

[FramFramson]

The squad configuration I was thinking of consists of:
1. lieutenant in heavy (landmate) powered armor
2. 2x sergeants in light powered armor
3. 5-20 regular infantry
4. 3-6 ammo bearers/loaders  
They would be sent against enemy infantry, but tank hunting teams in the same configuration might work pretty good.
Unit configuration would consist of powered armor taking the center while infantry hold the flanks.
In urban combat the armor would stick to the streets while the infantry would fight house to house to disable anti-tank weapons.
Another feature that would be handy if a suit had high powered cannons or guided missiles would be a target designator carried by an infantryman, so the suit could engage targets out of its line of sight.        

This seems like a good set up.

I like that it allows you to "escalate" things for particularly hairy missions (tank hunting mission, taking out a hardened target, extraction requiring maximum survivability for the spearhead troops), without making regular infantry completely obsolete.

I.E. you could instead have 2-3 landmates, 6-8 power armour, 8-10 infantry (for small spaces/specialized tasks/rangefinder guys/ammo bearer bodyguards), and maybe 6-10 ammo bearers. But in those cases you can make it clear that that's not standard operational doctrine for "regular" combat.

EDIT: another cool thing is that your power armour guys don't get a movement bonus. So even though your landmates have superior movement and senses, you would still use regular troops for most scout functions, because it's very bad doctrine to have the heaviest unit act as the scout as well.

[Mad-eddy13]

This seems like a good set up.

I like that it allows you to "escalate" things for particularly hairy missions (tank hunting mission, taking out a hardened target, extraction requiring maximum survivability for the spearhead troops), without making regular infantry completely obsolete.

I.E. you could instead have 2-3 landmates, 6-8 power armour, 8-10 infantry (for small spaces/specialized tasks/rangefinder guys/ammo bearer bodyguards), and maybe 6-10 ammo bearers. But in those cases you can make it clear that that's not standard operational doctrine for "regular" combat.

EDIT: another cool thing is that your power armour guys don't get a movement bonus. So even though your landmates have superior movement and senses, you would still use regular troops for most scout functions, because it's very bad doctrine to have the heaviest unit act as the scout as well.

This way a team can have a very wide range of firepower, and a decent mobility along with heavy weapons.
The loaders carry extra ammo for the powered armor and grant extra attacks to the suits if they're close enough.   

[FramFramson]

Yeah, I think it offers a lot of opportunities.

Some asymmetrical scenarios would be cool too, like an instance where one side is just three landmates or something (like the stolen landmate scenario in the comics).  In that case, the landmates would be free to use full mobility and power without having to wait for regular infantry, but be very vulnerable to massed fire and have very limited ammo and fuel (due to the absence of loaders/support).

[Mad-eddy13]

Yeah, I think it offers a lot of opportunities.

Some asymmetrical scenarios would be cool too, like an instance where one side is just three landmates or something (like the stolen landmate scenario in the comics).  In that case, the landmates would be free to use full mobility and power without having to wait for regular infantry, but be very vulnerable to massed fire and have very limited ammo and fuel (due to the absence of loaders/support).

The ammo limitations are the Achilles heel of powered armor, I found that in paintball its easy to burn through 1100 rounds in a 20 minute game. And I can reload my own weapons, something impossible with integrated weapons you would most likely find on powered armor.

The scenario I had in mind when messing with these rules was a horde of Soviet based infantry and medically enhanced soldiers Vs powered armor teams.   

[FramFramson]

Yeah, there's basically no room for stowage on powered suits or even landmates. I think that's a very good balancing factor there.

There's probably going to be loads of scenarios you can run. Depends on how much you and your chums want to play!

[Mad-eddy13]

Yeah, there's basically no room for stowage on powered suits or even landmates. I think that's a very good balancing factor there.

There's probably going to be loads of scenarios you can run. Depends on how much you and your chums want to play!

I'm also floating an idea for an unarmored suit, same defense as tougher infantry, twice the movement per turn and a pair of experimental electrical cannons.

[killshot]

Would spreading out your powered armor really be a good idea?  It reminds me of the how the Allies spread their armor out and the German's had dedicated armor units.  I know it's a little different, but I could see squads/squadrons of them assaulting and regular infantry following up to hold the ground.

[Mad-eddy13]

Would spreading out your powered armor really be a good idea?  It reminds me of the how the Allies spread their armor out and the German's had dedicated armor units.  I know it's a little different, but I could see squads/squadrons of them assaulting and regular infantry following up to hold the ground.

The problem is that powered armor has limited ammunition, so there for needs frequent reloads, these can be provided by supporting infantry, the only thing that can keep up with the highly mobile suits. Also in my scenario the suits have just entered production so they aren't deployed en-mass yet, but rather as force multipliers for infantry battalions.