Hi,
This "9" rule means that armies with lots of cheap infantry
who hit on 5+ will win out. I'd agree that this is a decent
compromise, if you change it to "roll a 9, then roll a tohit roll
using the units tohit".
Rune
>
> Fra: "Peter Ramos" <primarch_at_...>
> Dato: 2002/04/25 Thu PM 03:37:42 CEST
> Til: <netepic_at_yahoogroups.com>
> Emne: RE: [NetEpic ML] RE: Command unit targeting Part III
>
> Hi!
>
> I gave much thought to the "HQ problem" and I don't like all the
> fiddly-ness that is coming out with the current proposition.
>
> I wondered how to solve it and as many times before Heresy game me a
> clue on how to handle it.
>
> Now, the main issue with HQ units in the battlefield is that they are
> difficult to identify. In fact HQ's go to great lengths to hide the fact
> they are command units. Of course being close enough to identify them is
> one solution but from a game mechanics point of view there are too many
> loopholes (as in the current rules). Another way is to "hinder" or make
> difficult the ACQUISITION of an HQ unit as a target. The Net Epic rules
> gives you several ways of doing this (morale checks, penalties to hit,
> etc), but none offer the same level of difficulty to ALL armies (for
> example if you required a morale check for firing at an HQ then armies
> like SM would benefit too much). So, one would have to institute a rule
> that is absolute in the sense that it affects ALL armies equally.
>
> The idea that I came up with uses the "to hit roll" as the choke point.
> The rule would read thus:
>
> HQ unit units may be targeted just like any other unit, but since it is
> difficult to identify and pinpoint such vital units correctly during the
> confusion of battle the to hit roll to successfully hit a HQ unit is 9.
> That means you need to roll a 6 followed by another 6 on a second die.
> This to hit number is UNMODIFIABLE. It's unmodifiable because the
> ability to identify a HQ unit is dependant on the units capability to
> make that distinction and not how accurate the weapon is. Note this
> applies to ALL weapons, even those who don't have a "to hit" roll. The
> only scenario when the "9" rule does not apply is when the HQ unit is
> actually the closest unit to the firing detachment. In other words if
> you are fortunate enough (or your opponent is foolish enough) to have HQ
> close to you (more than any other unit) it fair game. If its not the
> closest then its real hard to hit.
>
> Advantages
> 1. It uses the same rules in place, nothing special has been made. You
> have LOS to an HQ unit you can shoot it, but with a to hit of 9 if its
> not the closest.
>
> 2. It eliminates ALL fiddlyness in the apply the rule, nor do we need
> interminable examples for different situations. If it's the closest
> unit, target normally, if not use the "9" rule.
>
> 3. It affects all armies equally, it doesn't matter what weapon or how
> good a "to hit" the unit has you still need a 9 to hit.
>
> 4. It does not needlessly penalize armies heavily dependant on HQ units
> like IG or orks. Rolling to straight sixes is hard, a chance of one in
> 36. Meaning for every 36 attack dice you get ONE hit, assuming the HQ
> unit doesn't save. You don't even need to play a battle to test this,
> just grab some d6's and roll a bunch of times and see how many "9" to
> hit rolls you get. The difficulty insures that this will not be a common
> event since excessive shooting at HQ's at those odds will lose you the
> game (those attack dice are best used elsewhere). Also it promotes
> maneuver to get close to HQ's to take them out, as it should be.
>
> 5. It's damn simple, only two things to remember.
>
> I'll let others determine whether there are any disadvantages to this.
>
> Peter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jarreas Underwood [mailto:jarreas_at_...]
> Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 8:40 AM
> 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/
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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 - 13:44:45 UTC