War College: Archetype Analysis -- Recon By Fire (AKA: The Use of Artillery)

This post started out at as a look at the use of Artillery in MFZ: Rapid Attack.  It stalled out and sat around for a while waiting to be finished.  Then I started a conversation about favorite archetypes on the MFZ Discord, the ideas started flowing, and I came back to expand this post.  Also, it's been more than a year since I've written anything for the War College so it was time to get back into the classroom.

There have been more than a few discussions about the different archetypes that we use in Rapid Attack and the one with -- what I feel to be -- the most overblown reputation is the Recon By Fire.  Not to say that a good reputation isn't deserved -- it is the second most popular archetype in my gaming group -- but I feel like people see the Double Arty/Double Spot and get spooked.  So let's take a closer look at what you can, and should, be doing with this loadout.

The main use for Artillery systems in Mobile Frame Zero is to deliver an "ENORMOUS HURT" at a great distance.  In this recent game we had seven Frames on the table with Artillery -- a count only rivaled by this game -- and they did a combined 20 points of Damage.  Which is roughly one third of the Damage inflicted in an average game coming from one quarter of the Frames on the table in that game.  Not surprising since the Commander's Handbook rates the Damage potential for the double Artillery of this Frame at 1.86/1.94/1.98 -- depending on how many White dice are involved.  The second option, and perhaps more useful, is the ability to disrupt an opponent's "Action Chain" at long range.  What I mean by "disrupting Action Chains" is hitting an opponent's Frame and forcing it to activate -- perhaps before they've formulated a plan -- but definitely before a companion Frame has placed a Spot for the first Frame to use.  Or if an opponent has a bunch of Frames in a row waiting to crash into the Defensive Perimeter you target one of the Frames in the middle of the stack so it has to move out and around the others which are still waiting to Activate.  This interrupts an opponent's offensive scheme, disconnects Spot chains, and prevents possible Cover movement from double Defense frames.

The other use for the RbF -- as I abbreviate it -- is to drop Spots wherever it can.  According to the Commander's Handbook with two Yellow dice the average Spot is 4.47, with two Yellow dice and a White die the average Spot is 4.96, and with two Yellow dice and two White dice the average Spot is 5.24.  The great thing about Spotting is the social engineering it encourages.  Yes, you can use it for yourself.  But, you could always drop a big, juicy 6 Spot on a target right in front of the Brawler that the Primary Attacker is chomping at the bit to use.  Or, if you feel like you're getting picked on just a little too much you can drop that Spot on a third party to distract the person that's been lighting you up.

Although I've mentioned using White dice to back up the Artillery and Spotting, in reality you're going to use them primarily for Defense -- as it has no native Defense -- and secondarily for Movement.  Most of the time you'll probably park this Frame someplace relatively safe and hopefully not have to move beyond some sort of emergency.

System removal for this loadout is like this; Artillery, Artillery, Spotting, Spotting.  It's done this way because Artillery doesn't lose range -- just effectiveness -- when downgraded, but Spotting does.  Debuffing a Frame's defense can help you and other players so you want that to last as long as possible.

The most Recon By Fires I've seen in a squad is four.  (In fact Tom's squad in this game was 80% RbFs.)  Normally it's a splash of one or two to add some long range oomph.

War College: Squad Composition

We were discussing squad composition over on the Discord last week and it's made me think about it more in depth.  Squads in MFZ: Rapid Attack should have a purpose.  This is not about "I need X melee, Y Direct Fire, and Z Artillery frames to make a squad.  You can't just put a bunch of archetypes on the table and expect them to work together.  At the risk of using a business buzzword, the Frames in your squad need to work synergistically.

To start with, I find that "Soldiers All the Way Down" works well as a catch-all squad to put on the table when you don't have a plan and you don't know whom you're facing.  X amount of Frames all sporting (2Rd/1B/1G/1Y) with one or more of them carrying Single Shot Rockets.  As they all have the same loadout they can all support one another, move, and possibly attack in concert depending on how the Initiative Stack favors you.  It scales up, it scales down, and it works fairly well at either end of the spectrum.

There's a squad that gets used by one of the players in my group that works pretty well.  It's (3x) Armored Swarmers (2Rh/2B/1Y/1Gd8/2W), (2x) Hammers (2Rd/2B/1Y/2W), and (1x) Recon by Fire (2Ra+d8/2Y/2W).  The RbF sets Spots for the Armored Swarmers-- and maybe softens targets up a bit.  The Armored Swarmers chew into the opponent and set Spots for the Hammers.  The Hammers bat clean-up.  This is an offensive squad.  It's meant to start on the Defender's Perimeter and crash inward wreaking havoc all the way in.

Moving on to a pretty advanced strategy, the Frames in the Sniping Turtle Formation all have roles.  The Watchtower Frames provide Cover and Spots for whichever Artillery based Frame is used as the "hitter" for the squad.  While the Medium Artillerist -- for example -- provides the long range damage potential.  It's meant to be defensive.  The operating plan is to retreat away from your opponents into a "hull down position" -- to borrow a tanker term -- then sow discord with Spots while sniping soft targets.

If we want to get even more advanced, then you can try my squad of Defenders (2B/1G+d8/1Y/2W + SSR) from this game.  The first two Frames set the Perimeter, the third one captures any open station.  Then you spend the rest of the game running away, while setting Spots, and hopefully use your three SSRs to destroy some enemy Frames.

MFZ: RA is a game that requires a lot of thought before you even hit the table.  If you get the mix of Frames/Systems right to be where you want in the Initiative Stack and you put together a mix of archetypes that you think will work well together, you still have to get through the Set-Up Phase correctly.  If you place a melee squad at the other end of a long table from an Artillery squad you're probably not going to get in range before the game is over.  In more ways than one.  That is also a conversation to have at a different point in time.

So, in short, have a plan.  Pick the Weaponry for the range you want to work at.  Pick enough Defense to survive long enough to execute your plan.  Pick enough Movement to capture Stations, or run away.  And lastly pick enough Spotting to enhance your -- or someone else's -- attacks.  Then, go to it.

War College: Intercept Orbit Archetypes

We generally don't talk much about Intercept Orbit, whether it's lack of players or lack of interest I'm not sure.  I'm trying to get my group to play on a more regular basis, if only to use all the cool starships I've made out of Lego.  Anyway.  With the lack of talk there's a lack of designing and talking about how systems interact in IO and a lack of Archetypes.  I've come up with a few so I'm going to list them here for people to discuss.

Battle Cruiser: Two Assault attachments, two Defensive attachments, built on a Cruiser hull. (2Ras+d8/2B/2W)
Loadout (4 systems): 2A2D2W
Role: The heavy hitter, meant to absorb damage and dish it out.

Blockade Runner: One Assault attachment, two Defensive attachments, built on a Frigate hull. (2Ras/2B/2W)
Loadout (3 systems): 1A2D2W
Role: Using the enhanced agility and speed of the Frigate hull, this ship is meant to cut through enemy lines and survive.  It also has a decent punch to help damage any enemy ships it might encounter.

Carrier: Two Catapult attachments, one Point Defense attachment, one Defensive attachment, built on a Cruiser hull. (1Rpd/2K/1B/2W)
Loadout (2 systems): 1PD2K1D2W
Role: Frame Squad delivery system.

Armored Carrier: Two Catapult attachments, two Defensive attachments, built on a Cruiser hull. (2K/2B/2W)
Loadout (2 systems): 2K2D2W
Role: More armor than a normal Carrier but less in the way of active defenses.  It may need an Escort or a Frame Squad perched on it to act as that defense.

Light Carrier: One Catapult attachment, one Point Defense attachment, one Defensive attachment, built on a Frigate hull. (1Rpd/1K/1B/2W)

Loadout (2 systems): 1PD1K1D2W
Role: When you don't want to pay for a full size Carrier but still need a Frame Squad delivery system.

Pocket Carrier: Two Catapult attachments, one Point Defense attachment, built on a Frigate hull. (2Rpd/2K/2W)

Loadout (1 system): 1PD2K2W
Role: Another Frame Squad delivery system.  A little less durable than a full size Carrier.

Escort: One Point Defense attachment, two Defensive attachments, built on a Frigate hull. (2Rpd/2B/2W)
Loadout (3 systems): 1P2D2W
Role: Provides cover for a larger ship and helps scrape off problematic Frame Squads using a Point Defense weapon.

Hunter Seeker: One Support attachment, two Spotting attachments, built on a Frigate hull. (2Rs/2Y/2W)
Loadout (3 systems): 1Su2D2W
Role: A lighter version of the "Recon by Fire" archetype from Rapid Attack for Intercept Orbit.

Heavy Hunter Seeker: Two Support attachments, two Spotting attachments, built on a Cruiser hull. (2Rs/2Y/2W)
Loadout (3 systems): 1Su2D2W
Role: A version of the "Recon by Fire" archetype from Rapid Attack for Intercept Orbit.

Reconnaissance Vessel: One Defensive attachment, two Spotting attachments, built on a Frigate hull. (1B/2Y/2W)
Loadout (3 systems): 1D2S2W
Role: Designed to target threats in enemy fleets.  Built on a Frigate hull for extra speed and maneuverability to dodge enemy encounters.

Hopefully these designations make sense and work for everyone.  Maybe I'll be able to do more IO themed War College posts in the future.

War College: Defender Station Placement

I almost titled this "Defending Stations" but that's a completely different topic.  This post is inspired by a question on the MF0 Facebook group.  (BTW, I know it's Facebook but, it's criminal how little traction that question has gotten.)  I realized after answering the question that every post about Station placement that I've made is from the Attacker's point of view.  So let's change that.  I'm going to look at my Station placement from a number of games where I was Defender.  Mainly because I know what I was thinking/planning, and while I might be able to guess what other people might have been thinking I'd rather stick with something I'm at least somewhat sure of.

So the main point behind placing your Stations and Initial Frames on the battlefield as Defender is to deny your opponents space and opportunities.  By doing this hopefully you put them in to conflict as well.  The secondary (tertiary?) point is to give yourself room to maneuver and/or retreat if necessary.

Game 1.  The Red oval is a rough approximation of the Defensive Perimeter.  The Black hexagon is my Station.  The Yellow dots are the two initial Frame placements.  While the oval should really be centered on the Station, I wanted to show how much the placement of my initial Frames pushed back my opponent's Frames.  I chose that end of the battlefield because I felt like it had the better selection of structures that I could use for Cover and enough room for me to retreat into once my opponents started moving forward.  The Frames I chose to set the Perimeter were Artillery units and, if you look at the battle report, the Yellow one was essentially trapped in front of the "wall" created by the pumping tubes.  Luckily no-one capitalized on that.  My secondary Frames bore the brunt of the damage in this game.

Game 2.  The Red oval is a rough approximation of the Defensive Perimeter.  The Black hexagon is my Station.  The Yellow dots are the two initial Frame placements.  I used my Purple and Yellow Watchtower Frames to set the outside edges of the Perimeter.  My squad was set up to try the "Sniping Turtle Formation".  This time I went more towards the corner trying to block out more space for myself.  After setting the perimeter the Watchtower frames collapsed inward to coalesce the formation while dropping Spots.

Game 3.  The White oval is a rough approximation of the Defensive Perimeter.  The Black hexagons are my Stations.  The Yellow dots are the two initial Frame placements.  I used my Green and White Frames to set the outside edges of the Perimeter.  This squad was a sort-of variant on the Sniping Turtle except I had mis-remembered the idea I was copying.  I probably would have been better off placing my Stations further to the left in the photo to cut off the corners of the table on that side.  I also should have retreated and leaned into my Artillery options more.

Game 4.  The Black circle is a rough approximation of the Defensive Perimeter.  The White spot is my Station.  The Black hexagons are the two initial Frame placements.  I couldn't quite cut off the corners but I did secure a Cover dense section of the battlefield.  I also managed to capture two opponent's Stations during the Set-Up Phase.  Two opponents dropped Frames into the open corners but all the other Frames were squashed into the remaining half of the battlefield that I didn't claim. 

Game 5.  The White circle is a rough approximation of the Defensive Perimeter.  The White spots are my Stations.  The White pentagons are the two initial Frame placements.  With Cover being pretty evenly distributed I chose one corner that I felt had a little heavier cover and set up.  The Red and Lime Frames are my initial Frames and they helped to push my opponents to the "North" and "West" edges of the battlefield.  There was a small hole in the "Southeast" corner that Occam's Spork snuck a Frame and Station into.  I honestly should have just collapsed my forces inward and gone after Occam's Spork's other Station, or maybe tried to move to the "Northeast" corner to escape everyone.  But I basically stood and fought which is never really a good idea when you have a smaller force.

Game 6.  The Orange circle is a rough approximation of the Defensive Perimeter.  The Orange spots are my Stations.  The Orange hexagons are the two initial Frame placements.  This gave me two Elevated positions and plenty of really solid Cover.  This also left a fair amount of empty space for my opponents to move through.  While this seems like a good defensive position It may have lulled me into a sense of security.  A better choice might have been to set up in the trees and push my opponents into the open spaces of the buildings and force them into moving through the trees to get to my Stations.

Basically placing your Stations as a Defender boils down to a few steps.  1. Pick the area on the battlefield that you think is easiest to defend.  2. Position your Perimeter to limit your opponent's access.  3. Create as much space for yourself as possible when creating your Perimeter.  What you do after that depends on the squad you brought to the table and the actions of your opponents.  I hope this helps you and good luck in your next game.

War College: Archetype Statistics

 I've been working for a while on compiling statistics on the most commonly used Archetypes in Rapid Attack.  Mainly for my own curiosity but also to maybe get a better understanding of the game itself.  This was assembled from the battle reports I've posted on my blog, comprised of 62 games over 9 years that had clear enough information to work with.  Most of these games are with players in my gaming group -- or would become part of my gaming group -- but there are 9 games with players I don't normally play against.  Hopefully other groups will keep start keeping track of this kind of information and we can generate a larger database for everyone to utilize.

To explain some of the terms in the Header; "Name" is the name the Archetype is commonly known by.  As you can see there are more than a few that remain nameless.  "Sys1", "Sys2", "Sys3", and "Sys4" are the Systems used by the Archetype, using standard System Notation.  "Quan.", short for quantity, is the number of times that Archetype appears.  "Games" is the number of game it appears in.  "% Chance" is the chance of seeing this Archetype on the table in any given game.  "Commonality" is the percentage of how many of any given squad will possibly be this Archetype.

I used the following formulas and numbers to derive this information.

% Chance = (# of games it appeared in) / (total games)

Commonality = (quantity) / (total quantity)

Total Games = 62.

Total Frames = 1127.

I hope that people find this information useful.

War College: Station Placement

More accurately, the title should be "War College: Station Placement for Attackers".  Beyond the normal "Keep My Stations Away from My Opponents" methodology, Station placement can be a tactical tool.  We've already discussed this a few times in talking about the Rook Maneuver but it can be more than just that.

Let's take a look at our last game to illustrate what I'm talking about.  Phungkyjams was Defender, Occam's Spork was Primary Attacker, and I was an Attacker.

Occam's Spork placed his Stations (black oval) fairly close to Phungkyjams' Perimeter but clustered the majority of his squad around his Stations.  This is good for maintaining control but isn't going to draw the Defender out of their position.

I tried two different tactics with my Station placement.  I used the Rook Maneuver for my Orange station (orange square).  I was running a majority melee-based squad so I needed most of the Defender's squad in front of me so I could execute a wave attack against it.  Phungkyjams took the bait on that one and captured it when placing one of his final two Frames.

My second gambit was to place my Blue station (blue pentagon) in an undefended position at the far end of the battlefield from my squad.  The rational behind this was to draw one of Phungkyjams' Frames out and away from the scrum that was sure to happen in the middle of the battlefield.  This would be one less Frame for me to deal with once my forces crossed the Perimeter and it would also possibly delay that Frame's engagement with any other forces on the table.  Yes, I would lose points if it was captured but that was a risk I was willing to take.  Phungkyjams didn't bite on this lure at the start but he did make a late game play for the Station.  This just shifted the timing of the force reduction from early to late game.

So, the next time you're playing and you're an Attacker, think of what benefits your Station placement can give you.

War College: An "Average" MFZ: Rapid Attack Game

I've been data mining my battle reports after a comment of "we had a lot of Station Dancing in this game" at the last game.  After a while it turned into a look at what comprises an "average" game of Mobile Frame Zero: Rapid Attack.  This is eight years of data -- the first usable battle report for this was in 2016 -- yielding a total of 49 games and the averages look pretty interesting.  Keep in mind that this reflects mostly my group's metagame.  Only 14% of the games used for data feature outside players (7 out of 49).  Your metagame will vary in some way depending on how many players, how much terrain is on your battlefield, etc.  Also keep in mind that I only had accurate enough records in 49 games out of 82 -- roughly 60% -- so that missing data may have skewed some of the results in a different direction.  I may, at some point, look at when certain things are more likely to happen in a game but that will be a project for another day.

Average

Number of Players: 4.

Number of Rounds: 4.

Total Number of Frames: 18.

Total Number of Stations: 6.

Total Damage: 62 points.

Cover Damage: 5 points.

Falling Damage: <1 point.*

Total Number of Hits: 28.

Number of Hits on Cover: 3.

Number of Frame Destroyed: 5.

Pieces of Cover Destroyed: 2.

Number of Station Captures: 6.

Number of Station Dances: 4.

Most

Players: multiple ties for 6.

Rounds: 6 {Totalcon Throwdown}.

Frames in a Game: 27 {The Henge @ PAXE20}.

Stations in a Game: multiple ties for 8.

Damage in a Game: 87 points {Airfield Ambush 4}.

Cover Damage in a Game: 15 points {DMZ}.

Falling Damage in a Game: 5 points {DMZ}.

Hits in a Game: 38 {Ice 9 (Expedition 5)}.

Hits on Cover in a Game: 7 {DMZ}.

Frames Destroyed in a Game: multiple ties for 9.

Pieces of Cover Destroyed in a Game: multiple ties for 4.

Station Captures in a Game: 12 {Ice 9}.

Station Dances in a Game: 13 {Ice 9 (Expedition 5)}.

Least

Players: 2 {Totalcon Throwdown}.

Rounds: multiple ties for 3.

Frames in a Game: 11 {Totalcon Throwdown}.

Stations in a Game: multiple ties for 5.

Damage in a Game: 28 points {Teslaville}.

Cover Damage in a Game: multiple ties for 0.

Falling Damage in a Game: multiple ties for 0.

Hits in a Game: 17 {Teslaville}.

Hits on Cover in a Game: multiple ties for 0.

Frames Destroyed in a Game: multiple ties for 2.

Pieces of Cover Destroyed in a Game: multiple ties for 0.

Station Captures in a Game: multiple ties for 1.

Station Dances in a Game: multiple ties for 0.

Weirdest data point: 4 points of Falling damage inflicted on Terrain. {Teslaville 2}

* Falling damage is kind of weird.  It only happens in 9 games out of the 49 that had clear enough info to use.  The average amount of Falling damage, when it does happen, is 2 points.

War College: Archetype Analysis - The Binary

Several weeks ago I was having a chat with Zeekhotep and I mentioned I was thinking about analyzing the Binary archetype.  He said that would be of interest to him, so here we go.  Here's the breakdown for those not familiar with it.

Binary: One Artillery attachment, one Defensive attachment, one Spotting attachment, and one Movement attachment. (2Ra/1B/1G/1Y/2W)
Loadout (4 systems): 1A1D1M1S2W
Role: The Artillery version of the Soldier.  This mech works best in pairs. Stage each mech (Direct Fire +1) units apart from each other. This allows each mech to spot for the other as they work their way through the battle field.

The way I see it the usage for this archetype will vary depending on where you start the Initiative stack.  If you field them as Defender they will operate on one track, and if you're an attacker it'll operate on another.  But then that's generally true no matter what archetype you're using.

Defender Implementation

As Defender, the best way to field this loadout is your starting pair of Frames that help to delineate your Perimeter.  That way they'll be at least one Ruler apart and can support each other offensively.  Unless you delay a bit the first attack from one of these Frames will probably have no Spot to aid it.  In that case you should use it to force an opponent's premature activation and disrupt their plans.

System removal should probably go Movement, Artillery, Spotting, Defense.  Generally you don't move too much when playing Defender -- and if you were planning on it you would have picked a different archetype -- so ditch this first.  The Artillery system is the second to go as that will give you the Sprint die and if you're halfway down the damage track you should think about moving.  Spotting is the third to go as it is useful in -- hopefully -- making targets of your opponent's Frames.  Defense is always last because as the Defender you need your Frames to survive as long as possible.

Attacker Implementation

As an Attacker, you're still fielding these in pairs to use their weapons and Spots in complementary/ overlapping fields of fire.  Once again the first attack from one of these Frames will probably have no Spot to aid it.  In that case you should use it to force an opponent's premature activation and disrupt their plans.

I can see this archetype being used in conjunction with Brawler, or Closer archetypes, or even both in the same squad.  Drop the Brawler as the Point Frame if you're Point attacker, place the Closer behind it to take advantage of the Brawler's double Defense.  Use those two as the point of the spear and support them with a pair of Binaries.  use the Binaries to damage Cover, damage opponents, and drop Spots to force enhance the attacks of the Brawler/Closer.

System removal as an Attacker should probably go Artillery, Movement, Spotting, Defense.  The Artillery system is first to go as that will give you the Sprint die.  This archetype needs to be pretty close to the front lines due to the limited Spotting envelope so dropping Artillery and changing to melee mode using White dice works as you'll be crashing the Defender's Perimeter anyway.  Movement is second as you'll already have the Sprint die.  Spotting is the third to go as it is useful in -- hopefully -- making targets of your opponent's Frames.  Defense is always last because you need your Frames to survive as long as possible.

War College: Targeting/Destroying Cover

It's been a few months since the last War College visit, and since I want to do more of these, let's spend the week in class.

While talking about data mining information from my battle reports on one of the Discord servers I'm on, I got into a discussion about targeting/destroying Cover.

Commander Rook brought up his tactic of using a Frame with minimum of 2Ra/2Y (Delegator, Recon by Fire, etc.) to target Cover, hopefully destroy it, then placing a large Spot on the Frame hiding behind said damaged/destroyed Cover.  Then a second Frame with a SSR or double weapon Systems -- think of something with a d8 for Attack roll -- takes a swing at the exposed Frame.  This tactic will "expose a frame to full damage without prematurely activating it and allowing it to reposition."  You could also use this tactic with Commando, Support Soldier, or Squad Leader archetypes attacking the "problematic" Cover instead of one of the other archetypes mentioned.  It might just be a little more satisfying making that first attack from across the table though.

This tactic should prove useful on battlefields with some sort of structure or heavy wall like my DMZ, Airfield Ambush, or Owen's Crossing.  I'm not sure how many people already know/use this tactic because I haven't seen it very often in my own gaming group.

War College: Single Shot Rockets

As I've already done two posts about building Single Shot Rockets -- and since this is a War College post -- let's look at the distribution and use of SSRs in your squad instead.  And, yes, the generally accepted abbreviation of Single Shot Rocket is SSR.

On page 134 of the rules it states that "Every company must carry the same number of single-shot rockets. By default, every company must carry 3."  Single Shot Rockets are not Systems and you do not lose them due to Damage.  Also, since they are not Ranged Weapon Systems, they do not interfere with the Sprint Die.  There's no page reference for this although it's kind of obliquely mentioned on page 65.

For distribution, in general I place one per Frame.  Other people, like Chuck in this somewhat recent game, have two SSRs on one Frame.  In this game I loaded them all on to one Frame.  Pete did the same in this game.  If you do that on a Frame that has no other Systems it's generally called a "Missile Monkey", and it's seen use in at least one other game.  In the "Sand & Trees" game Single Shot Rockets were the only weapon my Frames carried.

As to when to use them, the conventional wisdom is "Use them before you lose them."  Which generally means fire them all off in the first or second Round.  In this game all players managed to use their SSRs in the first round.  That's not to say a late game application of a Single Shot Rocket can't be helpful, take this game for example, a last round hit for 5 damage can be pretty powerful.  And as a counterpoint, going back to this game, using all of your SSRs in the first Round without proper Spotting can be futile.

According to the Commander's Handbook a standard Direct Fire attack, from a Soldier loadout, will potentially yield 1.49/1.65/1.75 Systems worth of Damage depending on how many White Dice you have to spare.  The same attack with a SSR added in will yield a potential 1.86/1.94/1.98 Systems worth of Damage -- again depending on how many White Dice you have to spare.  So if you manage to chain three Direct Fire attacks in a row on the same target using a single SSR in each you could potentially do enough damage to a fully loaded Frame to destroy it.  Alternately, if you use all three SSRs in a single attack you can run this up to potentially 2.22/2.24/2.25 Systems worth of Damage.

Switching to a Tank loadout with one SSR potentially gets us 2.08/2.12/2.14 Systems worth of Damage.  Going all in with three SSRs is a potential 2.32/2.33/2.34 Systems worth of Damage for an "Alpha Strike".  Of course this may invite attacks from opponents when they figure out that you could roll 4d8 for one attack.  But if you're going for a "Walking Target" aspect -- and you're willing to place all your SSRs in one basket -- this is a valid tactical option.  I'd be more likely to use one per Round though, as a potential 2.08 Systems worth of Damage three Rounds in a row is pretty powerful.

To go in the other direction, a "non-combat" Frame carrying the Watchtower loadout with one SSR for self defense has a 1.50/1.74/1.86 Systems worth of potential Damage at Direct Fire range.  Going to three SSRs has a Damage potential of 2.16/2.20/2.22 when using them all at the same time.

The classic Missile Monkey loadout has a Damage potential of 1.50/1.74/1.86 for one SSR, 1.94/2.03/2.08 for two, and 2.16/2.20/2.22 for a three SSR salvo.

Hopefully this helps with your distribution and use of Single Shot Rockets in your next game.

War College: Archetype Analysis - The Closer

We were chatting a bit about loadouts the other morning on the MFZ Discord and I got to thinking about the Closer Archetype.  And as it's been almost a year since I've done a War College post, let's go to class.

Here are the details if you're not familiar.

Closer: One Direct Fire attachment, two Hand-to-Hand attachments, and one Defensive attachment. (2Rd/2Rh+d8/1B/2W)
Loadout (4 systems): 1DF2H1D2W
Role: This is the first mech you place if you're the Primary Attacker. He starts outside the Defender's perimeter and rushes in to take a Station. He has enough defense to survive for a little while and the Direct Fire Weapon can be sacrificed to soak damage as well. After the DF Weapon is ditched it gains a Green d8 for movement which allows it to close at high speed and use the two Hand-to-Hand Weapons.

Someone commented that the Closer having three weapon Systems felt "dirty".  There's a reason for the Closer to have three weapons though.  It's one of the early versions of a "Walking Target".  If you look at the description, this is meant to be the first Frame you place if you're the Primary Attacker.  You want the Defender concentrating on this, "Oh geeze, it's loaded for bear!"  It's a psychological ploy that keeps the Defender's attention focused on one spot while you prepare a sneak attack somewhere else.  This may mean this Frame is a bit of a sacrificial lamb but as the Primary Attacker you should have Frames to spare.

A different discussion on the Discord had someone asking about which order Systems should be removed from Frames.  Other general use Archetypes will have System removal be whatever is needed for the task at hand.  System removal for this Archetype, on the other hand, should go like this; Direct Fire, Melee, Melee, Defense.  It should always be in this order.  Removing the Direct Fire system gives you access to the Sprint Die which supercharges your attack options for hand to hand range.  White Dice can substituted for Melee systems so those should be the next Systems to go.  Holding on to the Defensive system for as long as possible improves the survivability of the Frame.  Seeing as this is the Point Frame it will need that survivability.

You may want to arm this Frame with a Single Shot Rocket.  Using it on the opening salvo with the Direct Fire weapon would give a 2Rd+d8 attack identical to the dice rolled for the Melee attack.  You may not get to use a Melee attack on the first activation, depending on how close other players beside the Defender -- assuming it's not a two player game -- set up to this Frame.  This allows for a continuity of damage potential through multiple Rounds.

As to how to use this Archetype, point it at the Defender's Station(s) and charge.  (Although the Charger is a different Archetype altogether.)  The Closer is meant to draw fire and cause chaos in the Defender's front ranks so pick a direction and let slip the dogs of war!

Let's look at a couple of hypothetical initial activations just to see how the dice might be assigned.  First, everyone passes and you're rolling a Direct Fire attack on a potential target with no defense.

Die roll

Converted

So that's a 6 Attack, 6 Defense, 4 Move and a 1 Spot.  I converted the White Dice to Movement and Spotting.

Second, you've been targeted and you're generating a Defense and making a Direct Fire attack in return -- this time you have a SSR.

Converted, including opponent's attack

Die roll, including opponent's attack

So that's a 5 Attack, 6 Defense, 5 Move versus a 3 Attack.  I upgraded the Defense with a White die and converted the second White Die to Movement.

Hopefully this gives you some insight into the Closer archetype and its potential use on the table.

War College: Gaming the System

When putting together a squad for a game there are several questions you should ask yourself when choosing the number of Frames and number of Systems.

How many players are there?  Is it a Skirmish or a Battle?  Do you want to be Defender, Attacker, or Primary Attacker?  Figuring out where you want to be in the initiative order and how you want to play will help you construct your squad.

First step: How many players are there?  Knowing this gives us the range of Frames we are allowed to use.

Second step: Is it a Skirmish or a Battle?  Knowing this either increases or decreases the amount of Frames we are allowed to use.

Third step: Do you want to be Defender, Attacker, or Primary Attacker?  Now we start selecting how many Frames we want to have and how many Systems we want to carry.

Now that we've gone over those steps let's try and figure things out.

Let's just state right out, it's easy to be Primary Attacker.  Just show up with the maximum Frames and Systems for the number of people/game size your group has chosen.  If there's more than one of you it's a die roll to determine who the Primary Attacker will be.  This doesn't require much work.

Aiming for Attacker or Defender is a little more of a balancing act.  Underbid in an aim to be in the middle of the pack when everyone else comes in heavy and you could be an Accidental Defender.  Underbid too much and you're left with inadequate forces to survive the game.

The Oasis 4 game has a decent spread so let's look at that one.

1st & 2nd Step: We had five players and had chosen Battle for the game size.

3rd Step: I wanted to try the Sniping Turtle Formation so I underbid on Frames and Systems to try and take Defender, I chose (4 Frames & 15 Systems).  Nikko came in heavy -- full Frames and Systems -- aiming for Primary Attacker, he chose (5 Frames & 20 Systems).  The other three players underbid on Systems aiming for Attacker, Chuck chose (5 Frames & 18 Systems), Occam's Spork chose (5 Frames & 18 Systems), and PJ Nicht chose (5 Frames & 19 Systems).  

That lead to me being Defender (7 PpA * 5 assets) = 35 points. Chuck, Occam's Spork, and PJ became Attackers (4 PpA * 6 assets) = 24 points. Nikko became the Point Attacker (3 PpA * 6 assets) = 18 points.  Did it all work out?  I won, so I'm biased in thinking that it did.  :-)

If you have an established group, keep records of games, or post game reports online -- gee, who could I be talking about? -- it can be easier to estimate what your opponents are bringing to the table.  If you're playing against a group of strangers it's more of a guessing game and you could end up as Primary Attacker or Defender.

War College: The Three Amigos

I was recently asked if I'd done any write-ups of the archetypes used in Mobile Frame Zero: Rapid Attack and their strengths.  While I have the Archetype Archive page that's more of an overview than an in depth look at archetypes.  So for this meeting of the War College, let's talk about what I consider to be the three basic units of Rapid Attack; the Soldier, the Brawler, and the Recon-by-Fire.

The Soldier (one Direct Fire, One Defense, one Movement, and one Spotting): It can attack, defend, move, and spot, which are all the categories of actions within the game.  It can also do those things at or within a Ruler Length.  That makes this archetype the proverbial Jack-of-All-Trades, which means -- when it's undamaged -- it can do everything (provided you get the dice rolls you need).  This is the reason why it's recommended that this archetype be the core of whatever squad you put on the table.

The Brawler (two Hand-to-Hand, and two Defense): It can attack and defend, with some caveats.  It attacks at melee range but has the potential to deal the most damage in the game (for reference, see the first turn of this game).  It can act as Cover for other Frames in addition to defending itself.  It also has a Sprint die (Green d8) for having no Ranged weapons.  That makes this archetype a brutal close range combatant, especially in groups.

The Recon-by-Fire (two Artillery, and two Spotting): The long range hitter and enhancer.  It can reach out and touch the other end of the table and debuff any Defense anywhere on the table.  I think I remember one person stating they attack this archetype first if they see any on the table.  The only real limitations are the ones for Artillery, and the choice of what to drop when damaged.

As to how to make these all work together, that's the next step.  I could use some of the squads I described in my Meta Game blog post but let's do something different.  Let's try to build squads of different sizes aimed at different Initiative positions.  Since the most prevalent amount of players is three -- according to my data -- we're going to use that.

Skirmish (3 Players - 2 Stations, 3 - 5 Frames)

Defender -- Two Soldiers, one Brawler.  Use the Soldiers to set the Perimeter then drop the Brawler in behind enemy lines to try and capture Stations after they're all in position.  The Soldiers should support one another but the Brawler will probably be on its own.

Attacker -- Two Soldiers, one Brawler, one Recon-by-Fire.  The Brawler is the point of the spear, the Soldiers cover the middle ground, and the Recon-by-Fire provides rear echelon support.

Primary Attacker -- Three Brawlers, two Recon-by-Fire.  The Brawlers form a wave attack with the Recon-by-Fires providing support and Station retention.

Battle (3 Players - 2 Stations, 4 - 7 Frames)

Defender -- Two Soldiers, one Brawler, one Recon-by-Fire.  Use the Soldiers to set the Perimeter then drop the Brawler in behind enemy lines to try and capture Stations after they're all in position.  The Soldiers should support one another and the Brawler will be supported by the Recon-by-Fire.

Attacker -- Three Brawlers, two Recon-by-Fire.  The Brawlers form a wave attack with the Recon-by-Fires providing support and Station retention.  You can add in a Soldier for additional support and still not be maxed out.

Primary Attacker -- Four Brawlers, one Soldier, two Recon-by-Fire.  The Brawlers form a wave attack with the Soldier providing support, and the Recon-by-Fires providing support and Station retention.

If you're unsure of your strategy, or unsure what your opponents are planning then a squad of Soldiers is always a versatile -- and solid -- bet.

War College: The Demo Rules (my version)

In this post I went over the set of rules Vincent proposed using for the purposes of demonstrating Mobile Frame Zero: Rapid Attack.  I do things a little differently so I figured I'd give people a look at the way I run demo games.

= = = = =

One objective in the middle of the battlefield. Everybody gets two frames, both Soldiers.  The reason why I run all soldiers for the demos is the Frames may look different but they all do the same thing and that's easier to keep track of.  Also, you only work at one range band until things get damaged.  I set the frames up myself on the battlefield, one team at each of the major compass points, starting behind a wall of some sort.  It's important that everybody has a frame a Ruler length away from the objective, but nobody has one closer.  I also set smaller walls (1 Hit each) at the secondary compass points at half a Ruler length from the objective.

Because everybody's sides are equal, everything on the board is worth 5 points to everybody, so I just say that: "in the full game, things are worth different points to different players, but here, everything's worth 5 points.  You each have 2 frames so you each have 10 points. If you lose a frame, you lose 5 points.  If you grab the objective, you gain 5 points." Set the doomsday clock to 7.  Expect to play at least three turns.  "When the doomsday clock hits zero, whomever has the most points wins." Since everybody's sides are equal, nobody has initiative.  "In the full game, initiative depends on how many points you have, and maybe we'll see that next turn, but since everybody's equal, we'll just start on the dealer's left and go around." If you're quick with the rules, this is a 15- or 20-minute demo for 2 - 3 players, maybe a 30-minute demo for 4.  I think it's sort of easier to explain the rules as you go. I've always found you want to get the dice in their hands and GO. "Here's the Ruler, this is how Range and Movement works. This is a Frame; this part attacks, this part defends, this part makes it move, this part Spots (explain that when it comes up in the turn). Here's your dice, roll them all together and pick out the highest ones."  And so on, and so forth.

Here's a picture of Vincent demoing with my set-up.

= = = = =

When I run demos it's more about teaching people how the dice work and decision making within the framework of the game itself.  I'm not trying to teach all of the rules for MFZ.

War College: The Demo Rules

Once upon a time, Vincent's version of the Demo Rules could be found in a few locations.  One of them is gone (G+) and the other is not fully functional (the Hangar).  I know CADmonkey saved a copy, and I still have behind the scenes access to the Hangar so I can grab them if needed.  But that leaves a lot of people out in the cold so I'm going to post them here so we have another place they can be found.

= = = = =

One objective in the middle of the battlefield. Everybody gets two frames, one soldier and one hand to hand or one soldier and one artillery, nothing weird. I set the frames up myself in appropriate places on the battlefield, by eyeball*. Some in cover, some out. It's important that everybody has a frame at 5-6 away from the objective, but nobody has one closer. Because everybody's sides are equal, everything on the board is worth 5 points to everybody, so I just say that: "in the full game, things are worth different points to different players, but here, everything's worth 5 points. You each have 2 frames so you each have 10 points. If you lose a frame, you lose 5 points. If you grab the objective, you gain 5 points." Set the doomsday clock to 3. Expect to play 2 turns. "When the doomsday clock hits zero, whoever has the most points wins." Since everybody's sides are equal, nobody has initiative. "In the full game, initiative depends on how many points you have, and maybe we'll see that next turn, but since everybody's equal, we'll just start on the dealer's left and go around." If you're quick with the rules, this is a 15- or 20-minute demo for 3 players, maybe a 30-minute demo for 5. If somebody's not getting the rules, I try to just talk them clearly through the decisions their dice are asking them to make. "First choose your target. Now gather your dice: you get [these]. Roll 'em! Okay, now you need a defense number. Choose a blue or a white. Perfect. Now, do you want to move first, then attack, or attack first, then move? Great. Here's what we do..." * Basically in roughly equilateral triangles whose sides are the length of direct fire range. Some of the triangles include the objective as a corner point, some don't. The idea is to put every frame at a moment of decision, and an easy way to do it is to put them just within direct fire range from an enemy or a goal.

= = = = =

There you go.  I do things a little differently so I'll post those at another time.

War College: Accidental Defender

We've all had it happen, we underestimate what our opponents are bringing to the table or end up on the bad side of a die roll and get stuck playing Defender when we didn't plan for it.

So what do you do now?  I'll look at a couple of battle reports from games I've played in where it happened.

The first game is the one we played at Greenfield Games back in 2018.  We had five players and elected to play a Skirmish.  Which means we were allowed three or four Frames each.  Everyone came to the table with 4 Frames and 16 systems.  I ended up on the bad end of a die roll and had to drop a Frame from my squad -- which was configured to come in "heavy" and my strategy was built around being Primary Attacker.

After some quick thinking, and some deep breathing exercises,  I set my Station (red star) in the center of the battlefield and placed my two initial Frames (red rectangles) at the farthest points possible from  the Station.  This carved a rough oval (red oval) of empty space my opponents couldn't enter -- leaving them two roughly triangular sections on either side, and at either end, within which they could place their Frames.  Tom placed his Station inside my Perimeter during set-up -- the Rook Maneuver -- and I captured it with the placement of my final Frame (red pentagon).  The wide perimeter and extra points gave me a little breathing room at the start.

My plan was to fade inwards from the perimeter, run, and just survive as long as possible.  That didn't happen.  The balloon goes up and I get hit by three of the other players without provocation -- yes, I know I was in 1st place -- and lose two Frames.  After that it's just a scramble to keep my single Frame alive and grab whatever open Stations I can to maintain my point total.  I manage to keep my Frame alive -- even through a stupid slap fight with Joshua -- to the end of the game but I lose all the Stations I had once controlled.

What could I have done different?  I should have activated my Frames first and retreated into the two empty areas at the corner of the battlefield and then kept running away as much as possible.  I would have lost the Stations but possibly kept more Frames.

The next game is a little more recent.  This was our last game of 2021, held at the Paper Asylum.  I think Tom was hoping for someone to come in "light" and configured his squad to fall in to the middle by dropping one System.  Instead this led to him being Defender with every other squad coming in maxed out -- which is what I mean by the term "heavy" I used earlier.

So, what does he do?  He places his Station (black star) towards the center of the battlefield to establish his Perimeter (black oval) then sets his Frames (black rectangles) towards the back end of that oval to keep them away from his opponents.  While this doesn't create as large a Perimeter, this does leave a lot of space to traverse if you don't have Artillery.  Over the course of the game Tom moves his forces out of the corner to reinforce his Station when it appears most of the conflict is going to be between Nikko, Pete, and PJ Nicht.  In the process he loses a Frame and the Station but keeps his other Frames, this gives him a third place finish.

When I asked Tom about the game, this is what he wrote.  "Being accidental defender probably means you don't have the optimal squad for the job. This puts you at a disadvantage at the start of the game, not unlike getting a poor position during setup. So you'll need to take risky moves to win. But as defender, risky moves aren't the same as when playing from behind. Losing a frame is a huge loss of points, so you need to protect them. For example, instead of over extending to grab a base and hope you hold it, you'll move your frames out of range and hope your opponents don't roll enough movement to get the base. It can be agonizing, as you probably have a squad built for attacking, but a lot of times you need to sit back and do nothing."

Hopefully this helps if you get stuck in the same position.

War College: The Sniping Turtle Formation

Let's finish up War College Week with a strategy/squad analysis.  Since I was talking about the 2018 PAX Unplugged game last Saturday night with some friends, let's do a bigger breakdown of it here.

Shades Corvid debuted a new squad and strategy that year.  Made of mainly Magenta, Purple, and Black parts, the squad featured three Armored Spotters and one Armored Sniper.

The first step is choosing the archetypes to use. The Armored Spotters (2B/1Gd8/2Y/2W + SSR) will provide Cover for the Armored Sniper (2Ra+d8/1B/2W) using the Special Ability granted by two Defensive Systems.  They'll also be able to place Spots all over the game board due to double Spotting Systems.  So those three Frames will support and defend the Armored Sniper.  The final Frame will provide offensive punch for the squad and also act as a timing disruptor.

The second step to using this squad is underbidding.  Shades went with four Frames with fifteen Systems (4/15).  This was lower than the other two players who both had five Frames and 20 systems (5/20).  This guaranteed Shades the Defender position allowing him to place his forces as he wanted.

The third step is actual placement of Stations and Frames.  Two Stations and two Frames define the perimeter (Yellow line) and which area of the table he'll get to control.  As you can see from the picture, he chose an area that didn't have much in the way of cover.  This allows clear lines of attack to any incoming Frames.  I probably would have chosen one of the sections with four trees on a plate to hide behind though.  A full quarter of the table is within the perimeter.  One Station is left unguarded out in the open as a bait.

Fourth step, playing the game.  Because Spotting doesn't activate opposing Frames, Templeton can activate the Armored Spotters without worry of incurring an attack.  Although he may want to wait to see what the Point Offense frame is going to do since it starts the game inside of Artillery range.  Otherwise the gameplan should be to drop Spots to incite combat between opponents and delay in using the Armored Sniper as long as possible, then use it to -- hopefully -- pick off the weakest Frame on the table.  Because each Armored Spotter also has a SSR, they can each cross-Spot for each other once an opponent's Frames start getting too close.  One thing to keep in mind is that this formation will break.  It's just a question of When.  It all depends on how many opponents you actually have and how aggressive they are in attacking you.  In the actual game, it broke in the third turn and Shades sent a damaged Armored Spotter running for one of my stations.  Which was an excellent idea.  The best way to avoid an attack is to not be there.

One thing that could have been done differently is to use two of the Armored Spotters to push the initial perimeter out even further instead of starting in the Turtle formation.  Then, on the first turn, activate the outlying Frames and retreat them back into the Turtle formation.  This would leave even more space for the opponents to get across before being able to engage and hopefully add more time before the formation breaks.

Granted, all of this is conjecture as it's based on three year old memories and a barely-there battle report.  Still, I'd love to see someone else give it a try.

War College: Zebra Camo Tactic

Over a year ago on the Discord channel, Joshua wrote "The origin of the Swarmer, my Fuchikoma team, all looked alike, by comparison, and they'd crawl over each other to get to a frame, and the target would often panic and couldn't remember which one to shoot at."  The concept was named by Rook.

Now, I wasn't quite sure I believed this at the time but I think I have an example from the last game my group played that may help support this theory.

Look at the majority of Tom's squad (red outline).  They all look very similar.  Even the Sentai Marking -- using different colors to differentiate individual units -- is one tiny 1x1 Round Plate.  I actually gave up trying to track the movements of his squad in the last battle report because it was exhausting trying to tell them apart in successive pictures.  Was this intentional?  Probably, knowing Tom.  It seems to have worked seeing as only one Frame from his entire squad took one Hit for 2 Damage throughout the entire game.

Something to think about, yes?

War College: Rook Maneuver Revisit

Let's take another look at setting up the Rook Maneuver.  In the last game my group played there was another attempt at it.  I'm going to use a picture from that outing to illustrate how it could work.

In this picture you see the majority of Tom's squad arrayed in a stack (green outline).  They're all configured for Melee combat and ready to drive through the perimeter (blue line) and into my area of control.  His station, which I captured during the Set-Up Phase, is outlined in red.

As you can see Occam's Spork's, PJ Nicht's, and Narbey's squads are arrayed below and somewhat behind Tom's squad due to the Perimeter defined by my Squad.  This gives Tom a fairly unimpeded line of attack from his squad to my Frame which is currently controlling his station.  After that he has a direct line to my station which is unguarded.

Now I would have placed the Station further away from Occam's Spork's forces (pink dot).  This would give a cleaner line of attack into my squad and a lessened chance of interference from Occam's Spork's Frames.  This choice would free up my Green Soldier frame for placement somewhere else though and that wouldn't be optimal in setting up a clean a decisive attack run.  But, the actual placement increases the chance of combat breaking out between myself and Occam's Spork which is always good for the third player.  Let you and him fight and wear each other down is always a good mantra for Mobile Frame Zero.

The Initiative Stack at the start of the game was this: myself, PJ Nicht, Tom, Occam's Spork, then Narbey.  Hypothetically it goes I pass, PJ Nicht passes, Tom's lead Frame activates targeting my Green Soldier frame with a SSR.  As a first attack it will likely be unsuccessful, undamaged Frames generally end up having a 6 for Defense and the median attack roll for a SSR can't beat that without a good Spot.  After the unsuccessful attack Tom moves that Frame towards my Blue Delegator frame and places a median 3.5 Spot on my Green Soldier.  Assume I make an unsuccessful retaliation for my attack -- which is statistically likely -- my Frame doesn't move and places a 3.5 Spot.  The Initiative stack goes back to the top, I pass, PJ Nicht passes, Tom's second Frame activates targeting my Green Soldier frame with a SSR.  With the prior 6 Defense, 3.5 spot, and a median 4.5 Attack the damage roll will be two dice -- although it will probably be higher due to the early game having full dice compliments.  Let's be generous and assume both dice come up as Hits.  I eat one Hit -- probably dropping my Direct Fire system -- and Station Dance to avoid the other.  Tom's second Frame moves directly towards his Station and re-Spots my Green soldier. We return to the top of the Initiative Stack.  Wash, Rinse, Repeat.

If you read the battle report you'll know the game didn't play out that way.  I'm just showing how I would have potentially played that set up.  I'm also hoping this helps people think about how to implement the Rook Maneuver.

War College: The Rook Maneuver

Since a number of people have asked about this, I figured I should explain the term "The Rook Maneuver".

The Rook Maneuver is when a Primary or Secondary Attacker places one or more of their Stations inside the Defender's Perimeter at the start of the game.  See The DMZ and Airfield Ambush 5 for recent examples.

The reasoning behind this is that while you may sacrifice the points for those Stations at the start of the game -- when the Defender captures your Station by placing their last Frame(s) -- you will reclaim them as part of your ongoing attack.  It also forces you to follow through and be diligent about your attacks as you're lower in points even more than usual.

I named it after the first person I ever saw use it, so you may know it by a different title.