BRIDGE DEMOLITIONS S.A. vs DEMOLITIONS S.A.

Obermasterfurher wrote:
Q 4. Imperial Engineer - Should we use the stats as listed or the stats given for the Japanese Sappers by M2A0?

M2A0 wrote:
A 4.Replace the Imperial Engineer's stats with the Japanese Sapper. We'll put together a PDF card for this, too. Same timing note as above.

1.Soldier
2.1939
3.Cost 4
4.Speed 1
5.Defense 4/4
6.AI: 6/--/--
7.AV: 2/--/--
8.Close Assault 7
9.Demolition



Time to correct the database. Only Soldier (Soldier Commander is obsolet).
the US Engineer is the best one for his points, but the sapper with CA 7 is fantastic for 4 pts.

Another opinions:



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-mmarfox:

most of them have great Close Assault:


The exception to the rule is the Japanese engineer, which truly is a terrible unit. Here's a link to its stats

forumini.wikidot.com/imperial-engineer


Basically, Engineers are good at taking out obstacles and vehicles....most of the time :wink:


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-boersma8:

lately. The best thing to remedy that would be a nice spoiler by M2AO of some units we can expect to see in "Late War". (I'm actually confident that set WILL see the light of day, strangely enough....)


-M2A0:

Sure I'll bite.



I've been told that Late War will come out, but not in 2011.



I don't have a finalized list of the set. The list I have is only 37 units and is about a 18 months old......



Without a finalized list anything I spoiled could possibly not make it onto the final list, so I will refrain for now.



-M2A0:

(And for what it's worth, the minis I have purchased from CO are top quality. The DUKW and LVT-1 in particular absolutely rock!!! Now, if we could just get a transport for Japan ....)

Oh what the hell this is my one and only spoiler of a unit that "should" appear in Late War:



Type 1 Ho-Ha Half Track
-NjCo:

I absolutely love the news about the half track but the news that we are still a go for Late War is what will keep us going through 2011. Thanks for keeping our spirits up!




-Baron wrote:

Imperial Engineer was/is/will be a mistake in the set. All other engineers have close assault - all, this one lacks it. How come is an engineer then? This is the argument. Is like saying that a paratrooper is lacking the "paratroop" SA or a Spotter the camo related SA. Also in M2A0's book, this was with close assault, some dumb ass at WotC decided it was better to give us an useless piece for which to pay, as they did with the Sherman IVC...

How long did the gamers wait for the UK mortar and a high close assault japanese unit? How many sets?

So you say the speed of the mortar is a valid concern, a likely error? You arent fully convinced it was an error? What about the HoRo then? Do you notice any errors? What about the Slovakian tanks, do they have any errors? What about.. I will stop, you have all errors in the topic and there are more.


-Asbestos wrote:
The stats of the Engineer might not be a 'true' error, but I think the fact that its a common commander is.



-herky80 wrote:

I have a question: is the Imperial Engineer just not what anyone likes, or is it an error? Because these are two totally different things. There is no doubt that most people think the unit is weak and useless. But where is the error? I think they actually intended it to be what it is. Rather than revise this card, perhaps they just make a new unit along the lines of what this one was supposed to be.

-Da Judge: I doubt it's an error, just a bad choice for the unit, in most opinions. It's missing close assault is the main complaint.






-herky wrote:
Here are the card stats:



6 points

4 defense

6/-/- AI

2/-/- AV

Hand to Hand 8

Init +2

Command Demolition:

Each friendly soldier adjacent to this unit may attempt to destroy an obstacle in its hex instead of moving or attacking in your assault phase. Roll a die. If you roll a 4 or higher, destroy the obstacle.



I understand the gripes- it was not the engineer some people hoped for. Had M2AO not leaked info about it, I think opinions would have been different. The unit plays the same on the board whether or not info was leaked about a different unit.



I understand it doesn't do the same things that other engineers do. Instead, it takes on artillery at close range and obstacles. Good intentions from the game designers I think though. Too bad they aren't making obstacles anymore. So we get a new type of engineer, one that goes after artillery protected by obstacles- not the worst idea in the world.



The unit is well-costed for what you get. The defense at 4 is not weak and the init +2 is useful.



There are multiple (maybe even too many) units that don't make it into competitive games and this will probably be one of them. Not every unit is tournament-worthy.



If anything, the SA should be a little stronger, allowing adjacent soldiers to destroy adjacent obstacles, not necessarily obstacles in its hex.



-daJudge:I saw that you were going to make this and you should change it to a poll vote.



is this unit good?

Is this unit bad?



I think it would be overwhelmingly bad. it's basically a useless unit without any close assault.



A Royal Engineer has Close Assault 16 but a Japanese Engineer has a sword?

-Herky80: I wouldn't compare the two units- their tasks are totally different. You could just as easily say:

An Imperial Engineer gets Hand to Hand 8 but a Royal Engineer gets dynamite?



The only similarity is in their names- engineer. Just like a civil engineer is different than an electrical engineer.


-daJudge: Engineers blow stuff up. It's what they do. What else would the Imp Engineer do? He might as well be an Arisaka Rifle with a command bonus.



Infantry shoots stuff, fights hand to hand, and scouts.



Tanks fight tanks, assault cities, buildings.



The US, German, and Brit engineers have close assault and the Imp doesn't. I don't get it. I would never use that bozo over a Imperial Sarge as a commander choice.



An infantry with close assault would be an excellent addition for the Japanese, instead, they got another hand to hand chump.


-Herky80: I understand the need for a 'real' Japanese engineer, and it would have made sense to make one. But instead, they made a different type of engineer. One that assaults obstacles and artillery. The hand to hand sa needs to be looked at not in a way that this unit is going to duke it out with other infantry, but rather get close to artillery and knock those units out.



I like consistency though and would prefer every 'engineer'-named unit to have the same named SA to make it easy to conceptualize.



What they need are commandos- which is what this unit sounds like. Change the name to Imperial Commando (or whatever they might be called in Japan) and people are happy. But engineer makes us think of the other engineers in the game and then we are not happy.



I think it isn't so much the unit's stats that are the issue here, but naming it an engineer when it is not similar to other engineers in the game.


-Polish_Cavalryman: Clearly it would have been much better for a sapper with close assault 10 or so to be a common while an engineer with this type of ability would be the far better choice for an uncommon slot. The command type ability means I only need 2 of them. But it's a common. Sigh. Meanwhile Japan STILL has almost no hope for close assault of a solid tank.

-Sharpe: Evidently someone at WoTC has.



This is a great unit and I'm kicking myself for not thinking of it first. (Of course, maybe I have and I just can't remember it.)



Still, the Japanese need a high CA more than they need this.

-tigerfever : I really hate this unit. Im going to try my best to only own one of them. Now if they issued a revision that changed that hand to hand to a close assault then we would have an interesting unit. With a close assault 8 he could be of some use. I think this is the worst mistake in the whole set and I really like this set.




-boersma8 wrote:

Imperial engineer: Definitely NOt the unit we've alll been waiting and hoping for, but game-play wise not useless, I'd say. Does its SA make any sense? That's an entirely different matter, I guess. I mean, I'm no expert, but I guess it takes quite an amount of training to become good at removing obstacles, professionally attaching explosives to bridges, anti-tank traps and not to mention removing mines but apparently here it works like: "Hey look how well our Imperial engineer can explain how to do all these things!"Suddenly 50% of the Arisakas, mortar crews, MG teams, snipers etc. also know how to do it! If he's a bit smart, he doesn't even expose himself in the front-line, but stays behind the advancing troops. Man, this is some great skill.... :? Again, for powergamers not an entirely useless piece, but a very far-fetched SA.




(Possible) errors on statcards (E.g. mortar having speed 1 AND relocate MUST be an error, hand-to hand on sapper MAY be an error, if given CA 7, this would make the unit so much better instantly!) are indeed VERY annoying and having three players of the game give all the statcards a read-over before sending them to the printers would certainly have prevented this! Very annoying the more so since we were promised that statcards would from two sets ago on be accurate again and no PDFs would be needed anymore.



Conclusion: biggest issues for me personally are the faulty statcards and Japanese sapper, the other ones I can live with.



-FSSF: "Unplayable" may not be the good word for it.

Sorry i'm a french Canadian and words have not always the same meaning in french and in english.

I've also used the word "useless" in another thread.

So let's use this one ok?



The Imperial Engineer is useless.

If I am not mistaken, "useless" means I cannot "use" him, right?

Why?

Because he brings nothing new to Japan's game.

Initiative +2?

Japan already has 2 better commanders with the same.

Hand to Hand 8?

For 6 points I can buy 2 x Arisaka Rifles that actually have some AI firepower AND Hand to Hand 12!

And having a Hand to Hand attack is not why a player will field an engineer anyway! :x



Why does one field an engineer anyway?

For the Bridge removal factor?

Never happened even once in all the games I've played, and I've been at it since the very first base set?

To remove obstacles?

Sure, it's nice.

But do I need a Commander to be able to transfer his skill to others? Not really. I just need an engineer to be able to do it himself!!!

Higher Close Assault value?

Now, that's where an engineer is usually worth spending the extra points for!

But M2A0's infos of the Japanese Sapper had him with only CA7, that's not that good isn't it?

Well, I would have prefered a higher one of course, but it was still better than all other Japanese CA in the game except for the Hero. PLus, he was the cheapest engineer ever, and at 4 points you can field 2 of them for the price of most other engineers in the game. Add to this the Banzai SA and he was more than able to hit a Sherman.



So, in the end, aside from the novelty factor, I don't see why most sane player will EVER play the Imperial Engineer. So he might not be "unplayable", although having no good reason to pick him over a much more useful Imperial Sergeant or a SNLF Captain kinda limit his playability right? :wink:



As for the Polish eagle on soviet tanks (will be much more concise here, I promise). I don't think mot people are angry at them per se. There was one on the T-34/85 IIRC and nobody complained. The fact that they are 3 of them at the same time and in the same set, as if it's an excuse to reprint the same units without bringing anything new to the game, isn't that much of a deal either I think. No, the main complain is that they pasted a polish eagle on the "Guards" T-34, not just any T-34, but the "Guards" version! Now that's the main hurting factor.



-HeyYou: Ok, I got a look at the Japanese Imperial Engineer and read some of the posts in regards to it. First, I would like to say game play wise the Japanese Imperial Engineer is very playable and useful IMO. Command Demolition would be helpful to take down those barbed-wire often used against them. In addition, it doesn't limit the demolition of one obstacle per Engineer as the other nations. To have a bunch of Japanese Soldiers able to take down obstacles is a substantial benefit. At 6PT they are a bargain with their Command ability and initiative bonus.



As for it being common. I agree it should've been an uncommon. Maybe they should've move the Siberian Shock Troops to the common slot and this unit to the uncommon.



In terms of naming it as an Imperial Engineer, it may not have been the best. I think WoTC take may have been this unit is a foreman of sorts. Directing Soldiers on how to take stuff down. If this is the case, I can understand the reason why they gave it Hand-to-Hand instead of Close Assault.


-DaJudge: My quick opinion was that this set had a lot of crap in it and a few good things.



The Imperial Engineer is a joke, nothing less. We waited how many years for a Japanese Engineer and that's what we got?



Does he carry a samurai sword or does he carry stuff that blows things up? Everyone else's engineers blow stuff up but not the Japanese? Oh wait, he allows others to blow stuff up, ok, I gotcha. He sucks.



I was on one of our sponsor's web sites preparing to buy some singles and I saw the pictures of the units and was really disappointed. The infantry are the worst, they have a very generic look to them that just doesn't appeal to me like the older units do.



Some of the vehicles look really nice but several of them are so ordinary and for me, unneeded.



We've waited over 3 years for some of these units and here they are and they are just really, meh. Kind of disappointing.



In conclusion, I had almost $75 worth of units in my cart when I got so upset that I just closed the screen and said screw it, I'm not buying these!



Having just sold over $2,000 worth of my collection and kind of struggling with that because I wasn't 100% sure on selling it, I'm really glad I did and I'm even more glad that I didn't order any cases of this set. I might cherry pick a few singles of the "good" units and that will be the end of it.



This does not bode well for the future of this game, in my opinion but it is my hope that they will not keep making dumb mistakes and choices in the future! There has been some sort of "error" or issue in every set of this game going back to set 1 and it's really uncalled for. They can do better.
________________________