With the flamer template you are much more up close and personal. I see no
reason why you can not include a section HQ under this template.
Eivind
-----Original Message-----
From: Jarreas Underwood [mailto:jarreas_at_...]
Sent: 25. april 2002 14:40
To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: [NetEpic ML] RE: Command unit targeting Part III
><snip>
> 3) You're firing a template weapon and also cover a valid target.
>
>--------> GREAT!! When Im now playing against IG I will always lay down my
>barrages so they cover the section HQ of the platoon. It is always within
>coherency so it should not be any problem! I have probably demobilised most
>of his armies within round two!
>
>Get real. We cant have this rule. Noone knows exactly where in the platoon
>the section HQ is, so we cant really place barrage on it.
>
>Eivind
Hmm... Good point. Thing is, I really don't like the idea of giving a
blanket immunity to template weapons. I don't want to have my Flamer
Marines unable to take a really nice shot just because they'd also hit the
SHQ.
Should we make HQ units immune to template weapons?
What about classifying zero-range template weapons (dropped bombs, flamer
templates and such) as Close Combat weapons, thus removing the HQ targeting
restrictions?
Can we rely on the player's sense of fair play to allow targeting the HQ
when it makes sense?
*pause*
Ok, so forget that last one. *grin* How about the other two?
-Yar
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/
Received on Thu Apr 25 2002 - 13:41:52 UTC