----- Original Message -----
From: Albert Farré Benet
To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2002 4:43 PM
Subject: [NetEpic ML] net epic suppression (is it necessary?)
Hi,
I've been thinking about all supression rule proposals and I discovered that the most I think about it, the most sure I feel towards forgetting about a supression rule. I realized that the BIG problem of approaching to a supression rule is the wide range of diferent units in NetEpic. Almost every proposal launched in this list has very good points to use with some armies (mainly imperial) but is unable to get a good deal with others (mainly orks, eldar, squats and Slann).
In the end this leads to unbalance (which, at the same time, leads to this annoying smell of Gorgonzola...). If we want a good rule on supression, we should care about the points I listed in a previous mail plus these ones:
- Ork mobs. Remember that most ork infantry units are composed of 15+ stands. These leads to 2 problems at least: They are too many and they can be so spread over the table, that allocating many shots against some of them could not mean, in any case, to supress all of them.
Imagine a mob of 19 boyz, 10 on open field over a total distance of, say, 40 cm and 9 of them in neighbouring woods. THIS is a problem, because you need 19 shots to supress them, and it's quite possible you have no chance to fire at all of them. Even more, it's possible your fire arc only covers 8 stands on open field. Could you supress 12 stands you cannot fire at? It's not logical captain Kirk.
------>11 stands, my calculator gretchin has been fired.
Of course this could apply also to any unit which is partly out of sight. You cannot supress the whole unit by putting some of them under heavy fire.
- Squats, Eldar, Slann and similar armies composed of small (and few) units. Though their small numbers are balanced with good or very good morale, in the end it seems quite easy to eliminate returning fire from them.
I'm afraid that our playing system is not designed to allow supressive fire without a whole redesign of the firing rules (which BTW is a very, very bad option). I am for forgetting about adding supression under this rules and keep the idea lurking until a major redesign is done (if ever).
Albert
----- Original Message -----
From: darius spano
To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2002 3:13 PM
Subject: Re: Re: [NetEpic ML] net epic suppression
Hello,
With everyone talking about suppression these days I
thought I'd join in. It seems firepower thrown at a
group of troops and not casualty is what evryone wants
to reflect.
Let's say we will use supression or blast markers.
This would affect the AF phase. A blast marker is
placed for every squad firing at the unit, for each BP
fired at the unit and for each unit killed. The # of
markers is counted at the end of the phase (AF)When
the number of blast markers equals the squads break
point then a morale check should be made and if passed
suppression did not occur. But to make this fair,
every 2 markers above the break point would add a -1
to the morale roll. This would make those termies and
space marines in general more vulnerable to
suppression. Supression checks would be made at the
end of each phase (so 2 checks could be made, once in
FF and another in AF). A unit failing their
suppression check would lose their opportunity to fire
if on AF orders. A unit that failed suppression would
have to make a morale check in the end phase to go
back on normal orders. If they fail they go on
Fallback orders and if his occurs twice they are
routed or flee the battlefield.In the end phase all
markers would be removed.
Example: A Tactical Space Marine squad (9 units total)
comes under heavy fire from 4 different squads (4
markers), a barrage of 2BPs ( 2 markers) and suffers 3
casualties (marines or rhinos no difference). They
would have a total of 9 markers which is greater than
their breakppoint of 5 and 4 greater which would put
them at a -2 penalty on their suppression check which
is based on their morale (the space marines now need a
4+ to pass the suppression test). The marines roll a 3
and fail and lose their AF for the turn and must make
a normall morale check to go back on normal orders.
This realistically reflects suppression. Note: I
agrree that Tyranids and chaos are immuned to
suppression as long as they have their primarch. If a
chaplain or space marine/IG command unit is within
10cm then the +1 to morale checks would apply to the
suppression check. This reflects their resolve not to
crack under heavy fire.
That's it in a nutshell.
Best Regards,
Darius
--- Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Yes, thats true. <sigh> some rules are not meant to
> be I guess.
>
> Peter
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <eivind.borgeteien_at_...>
> To: <netepic_at_yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 9:18 AM
> Subject: Sv: Re: [NetEpic ML] net epic suppression
>
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > That was my first thought too! I did not really
> see the need for supression rules in netepic, but
> this could be incorporated without slowing down the
> game.
> >
> > Then I remembered that in many cases, if you have
> more supression markers than living stands in a
> detachment, the detachment is broken and might fall
> back anyway. I dont really see the need for another
> penalty once broken.
> >
> > Now Im back on the thought that supression rules
> are not for netepic after all...
> >
> > Eivind
> > >
> > > Fra: "Peter Ramos" <primarch_at_...>
> > > Dato: 2002/03/01 Fri PM 12:48:44 CET
> > > Til: <netepic_at_yahoogroups.com>
> > > Emne: Re: [NetEpic ML] net epic suppression
> > >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > Hey! this is not bad, not bad at all. Really
> simple and elegant. I like it!
> > >
> > > Any comments on this one?
> > >
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "kume1967" <kume1967_at_...>
> > > To: <netepic_at_yahoogroups.com>
> > > Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 2:34 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] net epic suppression
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > How about incorporating the suppression to hit
> rolls. When a
> > > > detechment receives casualties we can put
> suppression counters as
> > > > many as the casualties, then at the end of the
> turn if the counters
> > > > are more than the remaining models in the
> unit, the unit must make a
> > > > suppression roll. If the unit is suppressed it
> can do nothing in the
> > > > following turn. I think this is simple,
> requires no additional tables
> > > > and HQ, superheavies and titans are immun to
> this effect.
> > > >
> > > > Mete
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To unsubscribe send e-mail to:
> netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe send e-mail to:
> netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe send e-mail to:
> netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - sign up for Fantasy Baseball
http://sports.yahoo.com
To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Received on Sat Mar 02 2002 - 15:56:06 UTC