5/5 Soldier Solution Solution

[Colonel_Coo]

In order to address the issue of uber 5/5 soldiers dominating the builds, I propose:
Advanced RULE:

The first 5/5 soldier added to you army cost the printed price. If you add a second 5/5 soldier, that 2nd units price is +2 points. If you choose to add a third 5/5 soldier to your build, that 3rd units price is +3 points. Continue this increase for each additional 5/5 soldier you add to your army.

So, 5 SS PG would cost 5 + (5 +2) + (5 +3) + (5 +4) + 5 (+5) for 39 points. The maximum number of SS PG's in a 100 point build would be: 9 for 89 points.
The maximum number of SE Paratroopers in a 100 point build would be: 7 for 88 points. The seventh SE Para would be a cost of 16points.

By this rule, Heros would be impacted and likely un-restricted.

[NorthernRommel]

The easier way to deal with this Coo........

All 5/5 infantry and Tanks with more then 5 DEF count as 2 units for the purposes of unit limitations.

While it wont solve all the problems - it will prevent the 5/5 swarms.

EDIT: I revised this suggestion in a followup post. See an even better solution below.

[polish_horsy]

or start the second at +1 cost. But hey... I like it. I love it. I want some more of it. I mean.. I think it is a fine suggestion.

[NorthernRommel]

Well as a game designer and player I detest the existing 15 unit limit - but given the existing rules this seems the most simple and elegant solution , even to the purists.

[shadowhooch]

By this rule, Heros would be impacted and likely un-restricted.

That's not a good thing. No matter what the cost, the 5/5 infantry that IGNORES disruption and can be deployed through osmosis has to be limited. Remember what Tragicmishap did with Angriffing/Banzai massive amount of Heros. Not good.

A Hero should cost as much as a Sherman in my book of balance because they are just as effective.

[shadowhooch]

The easier way to deal with this Coo........

All 5/5 infantry and Tanks with more then 5 DEF count as 2 units for the purposes of unit limitations.

While it wont solve all the problems - it will prevent the 5/5 swarms.

Hmmm.. that might work and it is very simple.

[Vikingwarrior]

Hmmm.. that might work and it is very simple.


Big whoop. How does that solve it?
6x ss-pzgr
1x Vet Tiger
1x W.Vet

100 pts 15 units,Still got a swarm of ss-pzgr?

[Uncle_Joe]

Unless there is going to be huge cost increase in those units, going with 4/4 SR:2 or a limit is really the only way to truly solve the 'problem'. As was pointed out in another thread, even making the SS-Pgr/Rangers cost 7 still leaves plenty of room to have 7-8 of them and support.

Is it better than now? Sure, but it doesnt solve the problem of having to meta game against piles of high defense infantry and thus its not really going to make units that werent playable before much more playable (ie, will you play with a US Sniper or a German MkIII against the possibility of even 5-6 SS-Pgr/Rangers?).

[polish_horsy]

Big whoop. How does that solve it?
6x ss-pzgr
1x Vet Tiger
1x W.Vet

100 pts 15 units,Still got a swarm of ss-pzgr?

that is a beatable army. better than facing this anyway:

9x SS-PG
1x Vet Tiger

[Colonel_Coo]

Unless there is going to be huge cost increase in those units, going with 4/4 SR:2 or a limit is really the only way to truly solve the 'problem'. As was pointed out in another thread, even making the SS-Pgr/Rangers cost 7 still leaves plenty of room to have 7-8 of them and support.

Is it better than now? Sure, but it doesnt solve the problem of having to meta game against piles of high defense infantry and thus its not really going to make units that werent playable before much more playable (ie, will you play with a US Sniper or a German MkIII against the possibility of even 5-6 SS-Pgr/Rangers?).

Previously, I could play 15 5/5 soldiers in a single build.

With this, with the cheapest chosen, I am limited to 9 5/5 soldiers because I can't buy a 10th one. For the Elite of the Elite, that limt drops to 7 units.

From 15 units to 11 OR from 11 units to 7. That is a dramatic increase.

At what point do you get more bang for you bug for SS-PG's? At 8 points? At 9 points each (the cost of the 4th SS PG is 9 points)? What about the 8the SS PG at a whoping cost of 13pts? Isn't that a fair price?

If the SS PG should be 7 points, then buying 3 would equal to 20 points (just less than 7 each) and buying 4 would equal to 7points each.

I have never heard any arguement about paying 7 points each for SS PG. After the 4th, they become 10points each or higher. That is very significant.

Yes, you can still attempt to horde out a mess of 5/5 soldiers, but only having 11 is A LOT better than 15.

[Latro]

The more I read about it, the more I'm in favour of it also:

- either go for the defense 4, SR 2
- or put in a hard cap against elite units (max 2 elite, 1 hero)


... who do I need to bribe?

:cool:

[Colonel_Coo]

SS PG 1 through 4 = ideal sweet spot for them (same for Rangers) at a cost of 29 points.
SS PG #5 costs 10 points. Are you sure you want it?
SS PG #6 cost 11 points.

In 6 units you've speant 50 points!

[polish_horsy]

now I've complained as much as anybody about SS-PG and Rangers... and I think this is a reasonable solution for thosepieces. It hurts the SNLF Fanatic and other appropriatly priced 5 defnse units but it is as good a solution as any I've seen.

maybe for every 50 points in the game you add 1 more that can be purchased without penalty? So for a 200 point game 3 can come at normal price but getting 10 Rangers would still cost you a whole lot more than it used to.

[Colonel_Coo]

now I've complained as much as anybody about SS-PG and Rangers... and I think this is a reasonable solution for thosepieces. It hurts the SNLF Fanatic and other appropriatly priced 5 defnse units but it is as good a solution as any I've seen.

maybe for every 50 points in the game you add 1 more that can be purchased without penalty? So for a 200 point game 3 can come at normal price but getting 10 Rangers would still cost you a whole lot more than it used to.

In the end, they'll make a balanced 5/5 soldier with the ability
Common valor: Count this unit as a 4/4 soldier when building your army.

[Colonel_Coo]

now I've complained as much as anybody about SS-PG and Rangers... and I think this is a reasonable solution for thosepieces. It hurts the SNLF Fanatic and other appropriatly priced 5 defnse units but it is as good a solution as any I've seen.

maybe for every 50 points in the game you add 1 more that can be purchased without penalty? So for a 200 point game 3 can come at normal price but getting 10 Rangers would still cost you a whole lot more than it used to.

10 rangers = 130 points.

By the way, the +2 at the 2nd unit was needed to bring the total available in a 100 point game downwards.

[shadowhooch]

10 rangers = 130 points.

By the way, the +2 at the 2nd unit was needed to bring the total available in a 100 point game downwards.

mmmmmmath....confusing.:D

[polish_horsy]

I was saying in a 200 point game perhaps the first 3 could come at normal price... with that method 10 Rangers would cost 85.

[Colonel_Coo]

I was saying in a 200 point game perhaps the first 3 could come at normal price... with that method 10 Rangers would cost 85.

Very well could and still be reasonable on punch to price performance.

[polish_horsy]

I'd still stop at 5 Rangers for 30 myself (in the 200 point game example). the next one costs 9 and just ain't worth it.

[Vikingwarrior]

I'd still stop at 5 Rangers for 30 myself (in the 200 point game example). the next one costs 9 and just ain't worth it.


With that logic you might stop at 4 because 8pts ain't worth it. However if you look at 6 for 39pts for an average of 6.5pts per unit then it is much more palitable and still below the 7 pts/unit that some people have touted as what the real price should be.

[Colonel_Coo]

With that logic you might stop at 4 because 8pts ain't worth it. However if you look at 6 for 39pts for an average of 6.5pts per unit then it is much more palitable and still below the 7 pts/unit that some people have touted as what the real price should be.

5 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10 + 11 = 50 points, not 39. 50pts/6 units = 8.3pts per unit

The sweet spot is 4 units at 29points or 7.25 per unit.

[NorthernRommel]

Well as the other poster said better to face only 6 SSPG then 9.

But after thinking on other posts I would change my original suggestion so that it fixes some other limit problems.

1) Increase unit limits for 100pts of soldier to 20 units.
2) All 5/5, Heroes, Paras, and Officers count as 3 units for stacking limits.
3) All vehicles with DEF over 5 count as 3 units.

This will permit the Italians, Japanese, and Hungarians to actually field a worthwhile army to some extent.

Yes you will still have the SSPG army, however this particular change will place even better limits on the big units - and make secondary nation armies more playable. You may encounter a different kind of swarm of Fortress Defenders and Partisans, but really the game can handle that.

This does not count towards randomly selected platoon units. Obviously a system of some form has to be considered for inclusion in said cards. Since I normally don't use unit limits (and you really dont need them with random cards play - I know I have tested this greatly) then some changes to my unit cards would be in order. I find the Rarity levels on the cards also contributes to solving the gloat power game play problem.

[fifleche]

5/5 soldiers aren't broken just because they are undercosted; they are broken because their defense is TOO HIGH in relation to anti-infantry units that SHOULD be able to AT LEAST disrupt them.

Ever tried facing SE paras with MG-42's?

The MG-42 "pwned" infantry during WWII, in fact, it is STILL the German SAW in 2006 (it is a rechambered MG-42 and is called MG3 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheinmetall_MG3)), and that's a machinegun from 64 years ago!

But, in AAM, you would be the one who gets "pwned" by the SE paras. Not only are MG-42 more costly, point-wise, but they are unlikely to achieve more than a disruption on a 5/5 unit. The paras can just WALK over them and clubber them.

It's more than just "unit cost VS capacity", it's also "WW2 simulation".

So that is why I push to see 4/4 SR 2 instead of 5/5. Also, the "sliding cost" can easily get "complicated" or "abused", depending on the way you see it :rolleyes:

[CommanderlessMosinNagant]

5/5 soldiers aren't broken just because they are undercosted; they are broken because their defense is TOO HIGH in relation to anti-infantry units that SHOULD be able to AT LEAST disrupt them.

An excellent observation. One would need only to count out how many units have a maximum AI value of 7 to see what a great difference it would make if no defense 5/5 soldiers existed. The high defense of defense 5/5 infantry is what makes all non-anti-infantry armor (except the Sherman, KV-1, Vet Tiger and Elite Panzer IV) too weak against infantry. One might notice that each of these has an AI value of 9 or has crack shot!

[Lotus]

5/5 soldiers aren't broken just because they are undercosted; they are broken because their defense is TOO HIGH in relation to anti-infantry units that SHOULD be able to AT LEAST disrupt them.

Ever tried facing SE paras with MG-42's?

The MG-42 "pwned" infantry during WWII, in fact, it is STILL the German SAW in 2006 (it is a rechambered MG-42 and is called MG3 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheinmetall_MG3)), and that's a machinegun from 64 years ago!

But, in AAM, you would be the one who gets "pwned" by the SE paras. Not only are MG-42 more costly, point-wise, but they are unlikely to achieve more than a disruption on a 5/5 unit. The paras can just WALK over them and clubber them.

It's more than just "unit cost VS capacity", it's also "WW2 simulation".

So that is why I push to see 4/4 SR 2 instead of 5/5. Also, the "sliding cost" can easily get "complicated" or "abused", depending on the way you see it :rolleyes:

I have to ask this though: Does the MG42 represent a squad or a single MG team? The reason I ask this is because to my reckoning, a paratrooper unit still represents a squad. IMO that changes the landscape of the discussion because if the numbers represented by each unit are different, so would be the tactical ability of each unit as reflected in the attack/defense values.

And maybe I have it wrong...the paratrooper could represent a single infantry unit. Just wanted to raise this point as, to me at least, it seems a valid one to consider. And I understand that the Garand is a squad, but the paras represent a better squad (if a squad). At this point it gets even muddier...I know.

BTW, I agree there is a problem w/ AI values in this game, esp. w/ German tanks. I think if tank AI values weren't so lopsided in the Allies' favor we'd be on to discussing something else.

[Uncle_Joe]

OMG...twice in two days I 100% agree with fifleche's post. ;) The world must definately be coming to an end!

Yes, its about the capability to defy reality that those troops possess that really screws up the game. Re-costing them or surcharging them would help balance the game out in some ways, but they would still be unrealistic units to field. They are just too resistant to the harm that most weapons in the game can produce.

As much as Germany believed that the SS were supermen, they couldnt ignore bullets. And no matter how many people watch SPR and think that Rangers are godlike too, they shouldnt be able to ignore rifle, MG, and tank fire either....

BTW, I agree there is a problem w/ AI values in this game, esp. w/ German tanks. I think if tank AI values weren't so lopsided in the Allies' favor we'd be on to discussing something else.

No, the problem is a problem regardless of Germany's AI values. I dont think SS-Pgr should be nearly immune to T-34 or Cromwell fire either. Just like Rangers and Paras shouldnt be able to shrug off MG fire or tank fire.

And standard riflemen shouldnt have to get ridiculously lucky to have an effect on other flesh and blood opponents. We arent trying to model the Terminator here, are we? Yet that is the image that constantly occurs with us as the SS-Pgr or SE Para once again walks across the open through a hail of fire to contest the objective.

[Cpt. John Miller]

Cap em. If you can only have 2 of them then there goes the problem.
Recosting doesn't solve it. Restatting doesn't solve it. Only a LIMIT will work IMO. This solution worked well with the hero problem, and would be the easiest, simplest, most graceful fix.

[boersma8]

Issue a commander that give extra attack dice to standard infantry only ( SMLE, Mosin-Nagant, Mauser etc.) The garand already has sth similar. I propose sth aong these lines for the others too. This way in combination with a friendly commander they do stand a chance to kill an SS panzergrenadier, ranger, para or hero. When I play the garands see a lot of play. I think it's because of this bonus! ;)

[Tom_Weasle]

Well as a game designer and player I detest the existing 15 unit limit - but given the existing rules this seems the most simple and elegant solution , even to the purists.

I often think about scrapping the 15 unit limit but I would hate to play the game when someone experiments with a 50 unit Fortress Defender army

[Colonel_Panic]

I often think about scrapping the 15 unit limit but I would hate to play the game when someone experiments with a 50 unit Fortress Defender army

In that case - you need your "Boooh!" tail sign attached to your spitfire, and they all will run head over heels.

[shadowhooch]

I often think about scrapping the 15 unit limit but I would hate to play the game when someone experiments with a 50 unit Fortress Defender army

Agreed and that force would WIN 90% of the time - even vs SSPG hoards.
You HAVE to have a unit limit. There are only 7 - 10 turns of play. Trying to kill 15 units in 10 turns with cover rolls, removal of disruption, and hide & seek tactics is hard enough.

[polish_horsy]

US Para = 9
barbed wire x 62 = 31
tank obstacle x 60 = 60

123 units, 100 points. I drop on objective. And put my 122 obstacles between you and the objective. You have 7 turns... go.

[Latro]

US Para = 9
barbed wire x 62 = 31
tank obstacle x 60 = 60

123 units, 100 points. I drop on objective. And put my 122 obstacles between you and the objective. You have 7 turns... go.

12 Fallschirmjagers drop around the Paratrooper and have 7 whole turns to gun him down and wriggle their way through the barbed wire (2 movement rolls) ... shouldn't be too hard.


:D

[Vikingwarrior]

I knew someone would post a build like that to counter. :D

That being said, there still needs to be a unit cap.

[polish_horsy]

12 Fallschirmjagers drop around the Paratrooper and have 7 whole turns to gun him down and wriggle their way through the barbed wire (2 movement rolls) ... shouldn't be too hard.


:D


yes. of course it could be beaten. but how would your 2x croc and 8x Ranger army enjoy this? And would you really WANT to have to wonder if your opponent is going to place 123 units?

[NorthernRommel]

I often think about scrapping the 15 unit limit but I would hate to play the game when someone experiments with a 50 unit Fortress Defender army

Yes I am aware of that. Perhaps I should restate myself a little more clearly. In AAM I hate the 15 unit limit - because it is not well applied and it serves more towards the marketing department then the history department. Well some think it limits power builds - the truth is it limits infantry dependent nations like Chinese, Japanese, and Italians more. Even if they lifted the limits on those nations would help too.

Once we started used Platoon cards with AAM most of this problem went away. If you were to take the idea I mentioned above (20 unit - 3/1 rule) or use the platoon cards with the random unit availability deck then you will also generally avoid the problem. One method is just slightly more complicated then the others to put in place is all.

In my own rules I handle this through the use of Rarity Level, which is found on the bottom of the unit card. It limits how many of those Individual types of units you can have in a typical 200 pt game / Battalion Deck. I know it is a round about way of doing unit limits - but it is way more historical and accurate, and probably what WOTC should have did from the get go.

[Latro]

yes. of course it could be beaten. but how would your 2x croc and 8x Ranger army enjoy this? And would you really WANT to have to wonder if your opponent is going to place 123 units?

Oh, I'm not in favour of dropping the 15 unit limit ... I'm just a sucker for challenges (the word "Go" must have triggered it).


:cool:

[EricM 2404]

US Para = 9
barbed wire x 62 = 31
tank obstacle x 60 = 60

123 units, 100 points. I drop on objective. And put my 122 obstacles between you and the objective. You have 7 turns... go.

I'm sure wizards would apreceate seeing that army, thats alot of boosters Ebay or no someone somewhere had to open the boosters

[CommanderlessMosinNagant]

US Para = 9
barbed wire x 62 = 31
tank obstacle x 60 = 60

123 units, 100 points. I drop on objective. And put my 122 obstacles between you and the objective. You have 7 turns... go.

Perfect! I was waiting to test out my four Churchill AVRE's.

[fifleche]

Cap em. If you can only have 2 of them then there goes the problem.
Recosting doesn't solve it. Restatting doesn't solve it. Only a LIMIT will work IMO. This solution worked well with the hero problem, and would be the easiest, simplest, most graceful fix.Nope. This is supposed to be modeled after WWII ground combat. Now, ask yourself:

How many heroes in WWII? Alot.

How many hero UNITS? None.

How many SSPG/Paras/Ranger/Elites? Alot.

How manu Elite UNITS? Alot too.

No to caps on units. Yes for heroes, because they are an "intangible"...

[Cpt. John Miller]

Nope. This is supposed to be modeled after WWII ground combat. Now, ask yourself:

How many heroes in WWII? Alot.

How many hero UNITS? None.

How many SSPG/Paras/Ranger/Elites? Alot.

How manu Elite UNITS? Alot too.

No to caps on units. Yes for heroes, because they are an "intangible"...

You can take the "wannabe" part out of your title. You are the gro.

[bresh]

I said it in so many threads now, dont know why we got so many 5 def threads........................................... .................................

Limiting numbers seems like worst solution.
Only limit i agree upon is heroes, and so far when me and my friends played we useally say 1 hero pr player when its 2vs2.

If you restat 5 def inf to 4+sr3 they be easy killable, but you end with alot of units overstatted vs inf, mortars,anything with 8+ dice on medium range.

Regards
Bresh

[Uncle_Joe]

If you restat 5 def inf to 4+sr3 they be easy killable, but you end with alot of units overstatted vs inf, mortars,anything with 8+ dice on medium range.

No, the are 'easy killable' only compared to what it feels like now where super tough infantry dominate the game. They are still pretty hard to take down even with 4/4 SR:2, let alone SR:3.

And other other units arent 'overstatted' vs infantry at all. They feel 'correct' with the weakened elites. Everyone wants more powerful MGs and allowing the lower AI vehicles a good chance of doing SOMETHING to opposing infantry is far better than the current state of affairs IMO.

Sure, the mortars are unpleasant, but they are no longer necessary to bring to every battle. And firing 8 die mortar shots at 3 point infantry that has the same cover save as the more expensive guys is almost a waste... :) Ideally there will be about 50% more non-elite infantry to absorb shots. And if the non-elites actually have a chance of success on the battlefield, they will be more likely to be present, lowering the desire for the large mortars.

[bresh]

And other other units arent 'overstatted' vs infantry at all. They feel 'correct' with the weakened elites. Everyone wants more powerful MGs and allowing the lower AI vehicles a good chance of doing SOMETHING to opposing infantry is far better than the current state of affairs IMO.


Ok, i gonna say you are pretty wrong there, "overstatted" units: every shermans, KV1, the stuart, the humber and not least the bofor which is overstatted in general.
Eighter that or all german vechicles are "understatted" vs inf.
About the mortars, the US mortar is bugged big time with its superhuman ability. Heck its spotters dont even get the chat on radio malus.

Regards
Bresh