Legend campaign failure - report and how to improve
Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2018 12:10 pm
First serious Legend ironman attempt ended in September. Code black on regular GOp. Triple activation on alien turn. First time encountering majority M3s + 1st andromedon. Just did not have the firepower: one coil weapon per squad and the rest mag (laser on non-shooty classes).
I could carry on but I'm pretty sure it would death spiral from here, because the root cause is being too behind on tech, having been too short on resources in early/mid game to tech up in a timely manner. And M3 arrival just doesn't tolerate that. And the code black included both me and Aloysius, so... you know.
Not entirely sure what went wrong on the strat layer. I was not able to liberate until July (and then again in August). I just didn't get the missions until then. One single solitary supply raid (done as 4-man) and no troop columns (regions were mostly <4 strength). RNG gave me very few engineers, which affected digging speed and forced me to spend resources on a workshop. Also lack of corpses meant very late PG, so no alloy plating and no incendiaries until August. I actually had loads of scientists, but did several basic research as I just didn't have the resources to do the next big tech (and had to sell all the datapads). I didn't even attempt psi or Sparks.
ADVICE REQUESTED: How do people lib so early? Do you put scientists as haven advisers to catch lib 2? Would you do that even at strength 3 when intel raids are possible? How much risk would you take for Lib 2/3? Would you be prepared for a material risk of A-team deaths (e.g. it's Light / Light-Moderate, or lower but with a small team), in order to get through them when they first show? Would you consider doing a 'get attention' to draw strength form a lib region and deliberately boost strength in another region to trigger supply raid / troop columns (I usually consider those aren't worth it)?
I think on research order, I would still do a basic research but I'd time it for when I'm short on resources. If I have resources I'd do lasers first.
Class and build findings:
Assaults. I built loads and mostly right-side builds. Having lots is good because they get injured so often. However they are of limited use if they can't oneshot a target. And a laser shotgun doesn't reliably oneshot an M2 on Legend. So they need up to date weapons, which makes them expensive to equip and/or creates periods of obsolescence while you tech. Arc pulser build is quite nice on HQs for non-consumable CC on beserkers, the general and any high threat targets your sharps can't see. Less useful elsewhere: really a late game carry soldier as chain lightning is godlike.
Shinobis. I keep trying the odd experimental shooty build but it's too much of a carry. Bladenobis are just better. I used to make one stealthy/shooty shinobi for network towers and HQs: ghostwalker+covert let's you sneak under a turret over the door, and stops you getting caught/trapped while scouting in a long HQ mission. However it's not really worth it: oscar mike + command does the trick on a network tower if you can't sneak in, and building solely around HQs is probably not worth it (if they get wounded on the network tower they won't be available anyway). So bladenobi all day in future, with the only debate between combatives and shadowstep. Most of my officers were shinobis and they work well.
Rangers. Very solid throughout. I go WF->LO->CuP->Fort->Imp->RF->KZ. Very nice firebase soldier which benefits from using a basic tech weapon, so is always up to date. The anchor of my squads a lot of the time. Centre column is fun and quite good but I only build if a soldier with the right stats chooses to be a ranger.
Gunners. Bit of a late game carry. Tend to be either too slow or too low aim to be strong on many GOp types. But very strong on untimed missions, when non-consumable AoE CC is great (also cover destruction). I go suppression build or tanky/shooter. Both take CM and demolition. I ended up making only two this campaign and one died, so...
Sharpshooters. Did not have much impact on this campaign. DfA is clearly great on untimed missions but I just didn't do that many of those. Snapshot is great but requires soldiers of the right stats, so I only had one. And I couldn't afford mobility suits this campaign, which are what made them the standout soldiers in my last campaign.
Technicals. Love them. Build loads and went all rockets all day. Either all left side or taking shredder and RF if high aim. This was a mistake in retrospect. Rocket tech really need exo and T2 gauntlets to shine. Both are expensive. Next time I would build a few hybrids, especially on any that have quick study.
Grenadiers. Usually I love them but they did not shine this campaign. I have 3 builds: RD/Damage/Smoke, RD/Form/Sting, and RD/Shooty/Smoke. I keep trying to make shooty grenadiers work and they just don't. Even with quick study, they spend so much time training as officers, pistoleers or general AWC that they don't contribute enough. My other builds have been tremendous in my Commander campaigns but in this one they really suffered when I couldn't access incendiaries. My gatecrasher grenadier was my first SSGT and then didn't make it to TSGT until Sept. I think next time I might try some sapper grenadiers since they can do their job consistently throughout, and I do like my shooty rangers.
Specialists. Went OW. Trojan on high hack. Medical protocol on low hack. Field surgeon on all. As I said elsewhere, I find them underwhelming. A couple of very nice hacks but in general I wouldn't bring one unless it's a hack mission. I found the OW build doesn't do much before at least SSGT and probably TSGT (at which point it does shine). And I find OW doesn't kill much on legend before CuP, so they don't rank up fast. I am tempted to revert to utility/officer builds. Maybe favouring them for exo suits so they have some damage. And maybe pistol perks. And then I can take airdrop to support my sapper grenadiers to support my rangers.
Psi/Spark. Not built this campaign as I didn't consider them worth the resources.
I could carry on but I'm pretty sure it would death spiral from here, because the root cause is being too behind on tech, having been too short on resources in early/mid game to tech up in a timely manner. And M3 arrival just doesn't tolerate that. And the code black included both me and Aloysius, so... you know.
Not entirely sure what went wrong on the strat layer. I was not able to liberate until July (and then again in August). I just didn't get the missions until then. One single solitary supply raid (done as 4-man) and no troop columns (regions were mostly <4 strength). RNG gave me very few engineers, which affected digging speed and forced me to spend resources on a workshop. Also lack of corpses meant very late PG, so no alloy plating and no incendiaries until August. I actually had loads of scientists, but did several basic research as I just didn't have the resources to do the next big tech (and had to sell all the datapads). I didn't even attempt psi or Sparks.
ADVICE REQUESTED: How do people lib so early? Do you put scientists as haven advisers to catch lib 2? Would you do that even at strength 3 when intel raids are possible? How much risk would you take for Lib 2/3? Would you be prepared for a material risk of A-team deaths (e.g. it's Light / Light-Moderate, or lower but with a small team), in order to get through them when they first show? Would you consider doing a 'get attention' to draw strength form a lib region and deliberately boost strength in another region to trigger supply raid / troop columns (I usually consider those aren't worth it)?
I think on research order, I would still do a basic research but I'd time it for when I'm short on resources. If I have resources I'd do lasers first.
Class and build findings:
Assaults. I built loads and mostly right-side builds. Having lots is good because they get injured so often. However they are of limited use if they can't oneshot a target. And a laser shotgun doesn't reliably oneshot an M2 on Legend. So they need up to date weapons, which makes them expensive to equip and/or creates periods of obsolescence while you tech. Arc pulser build is quite nice on HQs for non-consumable CC on beserkers, the general and any high threat targets your sharps can't see. Less useful elsewhere: really a late game carry soldier as chain lightning is godlike.
Shinobis. I keep trying the odd experimental shooty build but it's too much of a carry. Bladenobis are just better. I used to make one stealthy/shooty shinobi for network towers and HQs: ghostwalker+covert let's you sneak under a turret over the door, and stops you getting caught/trapped while scouting in a long HQ mission. However it's not really worth it: oscar mike + command does the trick on a network tower if you can't sneak in, and building solely around HQs is probably not worth it (if they get wounded on the network tower they won't be available anyway). So bladenobi all day in future, with the only debate between combatives and shadowstep. Most of my officers were shinobis and they work well.
Rangers. Very solid throughout. I go WF->LO->CuP->Fort->Imp->RF->KZ. Very nice firebase soldier which benefits from using a basic tech weapon, so is always up to date. The anchor of my squads a lot of the time. Centre column is fun and quite good but I only build if a soldier with the right stats chooses to be a ranger.
Gunners. Bit of a late game carry. Tend to be either too slow or too low aim to be strong on many GOp types. But very strong on untimed missions, when non-consumable AoE CC is great (also cover destruction). I go suppression build or tanky/shooter. Both take CM and demolition. I ended up making only two this campaign and one died, so...
Sharpshooters. Did not have much impact on this campaign. DfA is clearly great on untimed missions but I just didn't do that many of those. Snapshot is great but requires soldiers of the right stats, so I only had one. And I couldn't afford mobility suits this campaign, which are what made them the standout soldiers in my last campaign.
Technicals. Love them. Build loads and went all rockets all day. Either all left side or taking shredder and RF if high aim. This was a mistake in retrospect. Rocket tech really need exo and T2 gauntlets to shine. Both are expensive. Next time I would build a few hybrids, especially on any that have quick study.
Grenadiers. Usually I love them but they did not shine this campaign. I have 3 builds: RD/Damage/Smoke, RD/Form/Sting, and RD/Shooty/Smoke. I keep trying to make shooty grenadiers work and they just don't. Even with quick study, they spend so much time training as officers, pistoleers or general AWC that they don't contribute enough. My other builds have been tremendous in my Commander campaigns but in this one they really suffered when I couldn't access incendiaries. My gatecrasher grenadier was my first SSGT and then didn't make it to TSGT until Sept. I think next time I might try some sapper grenadiers since they can do their job consistently throughout, and I do like my shooty rangers.
Specialists. Went OW. Trojan on high hack. Medical protocol on low hack. Field surgeon on all. As I said elsewhere, I find them underwhelming. A couple of very nice hacks but in general I wouldn't bring one unless it's a hack mission. I found the OW build doesn't do much before at least SSGT and probably TSGT (at which point it does shine). And I find OW doesn't kill much on legend before CuP, so they don't rank up fast. I am tempted to revert to utility/officer builds. Maybe favouring them for exo suits so they have some damage. And maybe pistol perks. And then I can take airdrop to support my sapper grenadiers to support my rangers.
Psi/Spark. Not built this campaign as I didn't consider them worth the resources.