RE: [NetEpic ML] Son Of HQ Targeting

From: Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 11:30:19 -0400

Hi!

-----Original Message-----
From: Jarreas Underwood [mailto:jarreas_at_...]
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 10:22 AM
To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: [NetEpic ML] Son Of HQ Targeting

Ok - I'm a bit confused here. As I understand it Weasel, your idea is:
'You
have to roll double sixes to target an HQ and lose the fire if you
don't.'
Please correct me if I'm not understanding something. For the basic 5+
To-Hit roll this works out to 1-in-108 shots fired at an HQ will hit.
Firing at an HQ is completely worthless.

---->No, you roll a targeting roll which is a 6 once, then you try to
hit with the units regular to hit. So the first "shot" earns you the
right to actually fire with your regular weapons and to hit. If you miss
the first targeting roll you lose your activation.

You object to my idea of: 'target on 1-in-6 and they transfer damage on
5-in-6' because "Its next to impossible then". The odds are in fact
exactly
the same, but you get more casualties my way.

I believe the term is "irreconsilable differences." :)

We agree that we want to make it difficult, but not impossible, to
target
an HQ. I think we also agree on the 'you can target an HQ normally if
it's
the closest unit, or more than 10cm or so from other things is it's
pinning
class' - let me know if I'm wrong on this.

Looking back, I agree that my ideas have been on the complex side. Let's
drop them along with the 'take the bullet' concept, and impose a -3
To-Hit
penalty for hitting HQ units? This would affect both direct fire and
templates, so ordinary troopers would need a 8+ and a Whirlwind barrage
a
7+. That's 1-in-18 for a basic trooper - difficult but not impossible.
Snipers would use their normal To-Hit roll (personal comment: we
*should*
fear snipers).

----> problem with a to hit penalty is that you get the unrealistic ploy
of using weapons like volcano cannons that have good to hit score to
target HQ easily. That's why Weasel and myself propose targeting rolls
of to hit rolls that are a high fixed number to side-step that issue.

Peter
Received on Fri Apr 26 2002 - 15:30:19 UTC