Assault the City! | Legions Imperialis BatRep | Solar Auxilia vs. Alpha Legion
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 фев 2025
- Build your Legions Imperialis army: • Tactics Videos
More Battle Reports: • Battle Reports
Thumbnail art by Mark Smylie: / marksmyliebooks
A matched play battle report using the "Assault the City" Flashpoint mission from the "Rise of the Dark Mechanicum" supplement.
Armies (2000pts)
Solar Auxilia vs. Alpha Legion
Mission: Assault the City
Secondary Objectives: Control the Battlefield (Solar Auxilia), Plant the Standard (Alpha Legion)
this amish village has never known such violence
It's a miracle a single building was left standing.
Another great bat rep lads. Keep up the good work filling the void of LI content out there.
Thanks so much for watching!
Another fantastic bat rep, there is not a lot of LI content out there and really appreciate the content you guys put out
Thanks very much for the kind words. I'm glad to hear you're enjoying the channel!
Enjoyed the first watch playing in the background whilst cooking dinner. Will go for another watch soon. Locally we are finding infiltrate very powerful, my opponents not liking the mutuable tactics from alpha legion. Whilst we are using probably as many buildings as you, we are grouping them closer together as little clusters - the fighting between garrison groups has been interesting
Glad you enjoyed the video. And thanks for watching! The way we handle structure is usually to count a large structure (6"x6") as being a single piece of terrain; small (2"x2") and medium (4"x4") we put in clusters of two to three within two inches of each other. I think for this video I might have set up the table in a more narrative way, though. Eventually I'd like to do a full urban set up and have some proper street fighting.
We were quite lucky to have plenty of city scenery at the game launch and have been playing those brutal city fights. We have actually started moving out of the city into the countryside. Now I’ve built up a load of woodland areas and agri domes. We have also played a few siege games too. If you can get your hands on some walls they are great fun. Can’t remember off the top of my head the rules for them are in though but worth a try.
@@xXRogalDornXx Glad to hear you've been able to put together a great collection of terrain -- I think that is a huge help to keep the game fresh and new. We are planning to play the grand clash game from Rise of the Dark Mechanicum, which involves a siege, as part of our local escalation campaign. I don't think that particular game will make it onto the channel, but we will definitely do something similar for a battle report at some point.
I think walls are treated as Fortification structures, which seems a little light to me, but I suppose it keeps it simple. The rules are maybe in Devastation of Tallarn? Definitely in the Dark Mechanicum book.
@ yeh Tallarn book on pg 64 has some rules for sieges. The walls and gates actually have their own rules including units being able to fire the wall guns.
@@tacticaeimperialis yeh we were quite fortunate that we have a fair few players in my local club with stuff left over from titanicus and also a mix of disposable income and old school crafting skills and hobby materials gathered over several decades in the hobby.
Thanks for the battle report, in regards to the terminators having there own command, if everyone agreed you should create your own rules and try them out. 👍👍
Definitely. Seems like it would be a pretty easy thing to create stats for.
I would be interested to hear more on Jeffs rationale for the need for Jump troop commanders and terminator commanders. If you wanted a commander to be attached to one of the aforementioned detachments I can understand that their profile would need to be adjusted so that they could move accordingly, but there would be little point as these units are often out on their own so the master tactician rule would not work on a lone unit even if it had a commander with it. You would need to ensure that there were at least two units with commanders from different detachments in master tactician range of one another for the rule to be effective and if you were going to that length to say be able to change a terminator order to charge after a deep strike, you may as well have a commander formation in drop pods accompany them.
I think what he most wanted was to be able to get the extra morale provided by the command stand. And for that you'd really need a commander with deep strike or jump packs to be able to accompany those units. Unfortunately, I just don't see GW doing much with infantry in the future, so I doubt we'll see these more specialized types.
@@tacticaeimperialis That makes sense. Personally I don't feel that is too big a gap in the rules as throwing a single unsupported unit out there is more of a clutch move and it feels right (to me at least) that its harder for it to be effective. If the unit in question is part of a more coordinated assault then accommodation can be made to get a leader up there close enough to be effective. It does require more planning though.
@@kalfoxx7749 I agree, and I think requiring some good planning to make an air assault or deep strike effective is a perfectly reasonable expectation.
Having Feel No Pain on them could also be nice against Overwatch
@@TheKingElfstone True! And it would make sense given the description of them that we have in the lore.
Great battle report, nice to see it go down to the wire at the end.
Surprised the Fast Attack detachment didn't make more use of its Outflank ability to pressure the defender home objective. I really like the jetbikes and javalins from this detachment, although my javalins are for anti infantry with the cyclone missile launchers.
Nice battlereport. Would be interesting to hear your rules issues.
Thank you! A video is in the works covering a couple of the major issues.
Glad you enjoyed the video. We really liked having a more extended battle -- helps to really get a feel for the overall flow of the game.
I think Jeff may have made the decision not to commit his Sky Hunter Phalanx because they would have been pretty isolated in the back field. And without support they die pretty quickly -- as mine did. I go back and forth about the cyclones; Ignores Cover is great, but I just don't like that they lose their anti-tank capability.
@@tacticaeimperialis I may have missed but was infiltrate restricted in this battle. I would have expected the alpha legion to be about 15" forwards in deployment so when the sky hunters came in turn 2 they could have lots of support from the options on the board moving forwards.
@@rathstar I may have briefly mentioned it in the video, but the mission specifically says all detachments not kept in reserve have to be placed in the deployment zone. I interpret that to preclude infiltration.
You could probably go either way on that interpretation, but for an asymmetrical attacker/defender mission I think it makes sense to have a more restricted deployment.
Nice battlefield, good to see some different terrain types being used rather than just buildings. Also good to see buildings that aren't high gothic, I feel it's overused in 30k.
Glad you liked the terrain. I agree on the gothic architecture -- it's iconic, but the imperium is a big place! There should be some variety.
Great battle report...agree with Jeff that assault and terminator commanders would be great...in LI almost everything dies quickly is the big lesson I believe!
It can be a brutal game. Some more infantry variety would absolutely be nice!
Another really good battle report. I am really impressed that you guys managed to go all 5 rounds, that doesn't happen often. I saw in another comment that you are working on a rules concerns video, I am really looking forward to that. I agree this game, whilst amazing, has some significant issues, some of which are really game breaking. Nothing that couldn't be addressed with some house rule adjustments. I believe you can mitigate against some of the more egregious imbalances by just modifying the scenarios without needing to change any of the core rules.
Glad you enjoyed the report. Rules video is definitely in progress, hopefully out in a few weeks, as I have a few other "new year" videos I want to do while appropriate.
I agree it was great to see a game go all the way to the end, and it really was down to the last few activations. I'm going to sound like a broken record, but the biggest problem is Infiltrate does too much when using a progressive scoring system. I think it's telling that this game was so close with Infiltrate removed.
@@tacticaeimperialis I agree. In order to mitigate against infiltrate (and make reserves more interesting) our local gaming group just plays sticky objectives that only score at the end of the game. We also adjust the points on all the objectives and secondary's to simplify the math more than anything.
@@kalfoxx7749 That's a pretty big change. I do like progressive scoring, but I also agree that large measures need to be adopted to deal with Infiltrate.
@@tacticaeimperialis It is quite a big change but as it only impacts missions which mostly have unique rules themselves its not too big of a deviation. I guess I am used to rewriting missions as we always did this for any tournament we hosted at our local club. I was wondering, do you have plans for a patreon or discord group or have an FB group? It would make idea sharing and rules discussion a lot easier.
@@kalfoxx7749 I have some vague thoughts about where to go next. Patreon or Discord are definitely on the table, but I hadn't considered a Facebook group -- that might be a good option as well. One concern I have about those things is dividing my focus too much, and taking time away from the channel. I think if we get monetized, that might be when I start looking at those things more concretely. We're pretty close on the subscriber count, but we need a fair bit more of watch time.
Great Format, Looks wonderful on the table!
Thanks very much! Really glad to hear you enjoyed the video
Nice battle report, thanks for the content! With regards to the rules issues I certainly agree with Jeff that there are lots of rules issues, but I think he kind of ruins the point by talking about specific commander types as that is easily the least of this game’s worries!
Interested in seeing your rules issues video and whether it aligns with my feelings.
Glad you enjoyed the video! I'm not as down on the rules as Jeff sometimes is, but there definitely are some things I think should be addressed.
I'll be interested to hear your thoughts on the rules video when it comes out! Should be in the next few weeks.
About missing some units. I'm missing some additional infantry units, specially in Solar Auxilia, since there is no shooty infantry. That makes the non-assault dracosans pretty meh.
I've pretty much stopped taking Dracosans, although they may have some utility as a reserve. I'm not sure what extra infantry we could get for Solar Auxilia -- maybe some Volkite armed Veletarii?
@@makinote I think there are still quite a few marine army units missing from the game. Vindicator tanks, whirlwind artillery, the Spartan variants (typhon and cerberus) and the marine super heavy tanks e.g. the glaive and the falchion. Infantry wise, we still need breachers and scouts.
@@tacticaeimperialisVolkite Veletarii would be a huge addition imo
@@TheKingElfstone I would like to see that, also. But I'm just not sure GW will see much profit in it.
@@TheKingElfstone I agree that it would be cool, but I'm not sure how much of a gameplay difference it would make -- they'd probably just be a lasrifle tercio with reduced ranged and without Chain of Command. Deflagrate is nice, but not game changing.
It would also have to be practical somehow for GW to release as a new infantry detachment box, and I don't see too many other candidates they could add to the box to fill out the spures.
Very few people ever seem to field spartans or land raiders. In your channel’s case, is it because the marine player doesn’t have any painted yet, or is it because he doesn’t think they’re very effective for their points? Just interested in hearing your opinion. I’ve only recently started building up and painting my marines.
Jeff has played with spartans and land raiders in at least one of our past battle reports, so he does have them available, but you are right he doesn't use them very often. I can't speak for him, but I would guess it's because the Alpha Legion special rule essentially does the job of a transport by providing Infiltrate or Outflank. Since your detachments are already far up the table anyway, those transport points are probably better spent on detachments with more firepower.
@@davidwasilewski I think the Spartans and landraiders point themselves out of contention. To transport an 80 point terminator detachment it cost 160 points of transports. You may as well have 3 full detachments of terminators and deepstrike them (or infiltrate them if alpha legion).
I get a lot of mileage from Spartans, throwing a pack of Wolves in them at enemy Infiltrators to tie them up or force them to Charge those instead of more vulnerable targets. This is particularly nice against Tarantulas.
@@rathstarI think Spartans should be used for Tacticals or Despoilers if they ever come. Not for Bulky models.