Re: [NetEpic ML] Son Of HQ Targeting

From: Daryl Lonnon <dlonnon_at_...>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 09:12:47 -0600 (MDT)

Jarreas Underwood wrote:
> 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.

Weasel's proposal was:
o Roll targeting aquisition die, 6+ you can continue, if you fail you lose
your shot. (This would be per dice? per unit? per weapon?)
o Roll to-hit ... save ... etc. etc. etc.

> 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.

So with a 5+, you get a 1 in 18 chance of hitting, 17 in 18 of losing
the shot.

Not quite as harsh as the one you proposed.

> 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).

The big objection to this is that statistically it favours weapons with
a to hit of less than or equal to 3+, since the chance of hitting goes
way down when you're to hit is > 6+. What this means is that low to
hit units are much better at HQ hunting.

DarylL
Received on Fri Apr 26 2002 - 15:12:47 UTC