RE: [NetEpic ML] Son Of HQ Targeting

From: Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 12:25:25 -0400

Hi!

-----Original Message-----
From: Daryl Lonnon [mailto:dlonnon_at_...]
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 11:13 AM
To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] Son Of HQ Targeting

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.

----> Per detachment or model that counts as a detachment. A successful
roll gives you the right to shoot at it with your normal weapons and to
hit value.

Example: A unit of imperial guard wish to target the ork leaders behind
a horde of goff boys. A targeting roll must be passed by the entire
detachment for them to do so. If successful they may fire with their
weapons normally at their to hit of 5+. If they miss the targeting roll
they do not fire and count as "fired" for the turn.

Example: A space marine HQ is within 10cm of a tactical detachment. A
horde of orks are close by and fire at them. They cannot try to single
out the HQ since its within 10cm of a detachment of the same pinning
class. However they could drop barrages on the unit of boys and catch
the HQ in the fire radius. That would be the downside of having the HQ
too close to the detachment.

Example: A chaos champion runs into a building and there are many other
detachments nearby closer to the enemy. Some detachments are even within
10cm. Buildings are targets-period. You get no benefit from the
targeting roll or by being close to a detachment. The HQ unit will have
to depend on the innate penalties to fire at him that the building or
other cover provides (this may not be as bad as it sounds since I have
some ideas for buildings and the protection they afford for when we
cover that subject).

> 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.

----> Yes, the odds are a lot better than the previous 1 in 36 with the
"nine" rule. Weasels's rule makes it viable to shoot at them, but you
must weigh the benefit gained versus the potential of losing the
detachments firepower.

> 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.

----> Exactly.

----> On a separate note actual HQ units (company leaders) should get
this benefit, but do units like medics, psykers and such deserve it?
They are real command units. If they walk around away from other units
aren't they obvious and should be targets? Of course if they stay close
to a detachment say the same 10cm mentioned in the above rule then they
can't be singled out. Doesn't this promote these guys staying and
supporting detachments like they are supposed to? Food for thought.

Peter
Received on Fri Apr 26 2002 - 16:25:25 UTC