That's a clever rule. Now we have more than one use
use for morale. I like it. So the company HQ for a SM
company would have the command radius for its company
and up to 5 suppoort cards?
Darius
--- Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I had started this post earlier today, but erased
> it. After seeing that
> the HQ "problem" is a pretty tough cookie I decided
> I'd go ahead and
> post it.
>
> I don't have a problem with detailed rules or
> complex targeting caveats
> for HQ units. My problem stems from doing a lot of
> work for units that
> do...well...nothing!
>
> Ask you're self what to HQ units do in Net Epic? Do
> they command? No. Do
> they have a control function? No. Is a company
> detachment really that
> hindered by their demise? No.
>
> So my point is HQ units behave as anything but HQ
> units. Their sole
> worth is based on their ability to move and first
> fire. That's it. Even
> armies like IG where a semblance of command and
> control exists you can
> bypass with free commissars or buying units like
> roughriders and bikes.
>
> So what are we protecting with these targeting
> rules? The naked truth
> is-not much.
>
> This brings me to believe that first we need to make
> HQ's into something
> that acts like a real HQ unit before we run off to
> zealously protect
> them with rules.
>
> Of course I have a couple of thoughts I'd like to
> share. No, they are
> not drastically different mechanics that don't fit
> with the current core
> rules or overly complex rules. I used what we have
> and concepts that
> already exist.
>
> Here they are:
>
> As it stands only two armies have any "line of
> command", but why not all
> armies? I understand Eldar, SM and others are
> "flexible" but to the
> point of having no command? Quite silly. Just think
> how changed a space
> marine army would be if we removed all the HQ units
> from the rules as
> they stand. The fact is they would NOT change. They
> are superfluous
> units in those armies. Again quite silly. Why not
> then make all HQ units
> have a command radius just like the IG HQ units do?
> Now you would say
> but Eldar and SM don't huddle around their HQ units
> like IG they have a
> more flexible combat doctrine. True, for that we
> also institute in all
> armies that in order for a detachment to receive an
> order counter that
> turn they need to be in the HQ units command radius
> (just like IG), but
> units outside the command radius can receive orders
> if they pass a
> morale test. In case of SM and other armies this is
> mostly easy since
> marines only miss on a one. But that's the point
> that gives them their
> flexibility, but still conserves a margin of risk.
> What if that that
> vital detachment rolls a one? The larger the army
> the more that "1"
> issue becomes important.
>
> More importantly is that people will use their HQ as
> true command and
> control because getting an order is not automatic.
> Even SM has to be
> careful since losing their HQ means rolling for
> everything to get an
> order, probability WILL catch up usually at a bad
> time too.
>
> The change is simple but of profound effect on how
> you play your army
> and HQ's. Marine players will husband their HQ to
> "critical" points to
> make certain they get the orders they need and the
> desire to T-hawk
> groups indiscriminately goes down since that unit
> deep into enemy
> territory might not always obey your orders to the
> letter.
>
> Elite units become precious since as a part of their
> "skills" they
> automatically get orders regardless of command
> status.
>
> HQ's become quite important this way don't they? So
> how will the rules
> to protect them work?
>
> What ever the command radius is becomes the HQ's
> safety zone. That means
> as long as he has friendly detachments within the
> command radius he is
> "safe". Now safe doesn't mean he can't get shot at,
> it means that
> outside this zone he is fair game to be shot at as
> per normal rules.
> Therefore it behooves the player to keep his HQ's
> acting as such always
> in contact with its detachments. HQ's out in the
> open away from friendly
> detachments (outside his command radius) or
> shuttling between two far
> away detachments are at risk!
>
> Within the "safe" zone it is one thing to be between
> unit coherency
> distance and maximum command distance and another to
> be mixed in with
> the detachment (unit coherency distance). It's safer
> to be mixed in for
> the purposes of direct fire, but dangerous due to
> barrages. ON the other
> hand standing off at a further distance within the
> command radius makes
> direct fire more of a problem, but you are safe from
> directly targeted
> barrages. We represent these as follows:
>
> If the command unit is in unit coherency of a
> detachment he benefits
> from the amount of people close by to protect him.
> When a detachment
> that contains a HQ unit is fired upon roll attack
> dice normally. In
> addition also roll 2d6 (if you have different
> colored dice roll them all
> simultaneously, if not roll separately it does not
> matter). See if you
> got any hits ass normal, if you do check the result
> of the 2d6. If the
> result is greater (not equal to or less) than the
> amount of remaining
> stands in the detachment (not counting the HQ unit)
> one of those hits
> goes against the command unit. If the roll is equal
> or less determine
> casualties normally amongst non-HQ units.
>
> Example: Four terminator stands fire at and imperial
> guard tactical
> platoon (ten stands) with attached HQ unit. The
> attack dice come up with
> 4 hits. The "separate" 2d6 are rolled and the roll
> is 11. Eleven is
> greater than 10 which is the amount of models in the
> detachment, so one
> of those four hits goes to the HQ unit. Had the roll
> been 10 or less the
> four hits MUST be spread amongst the tactical stands
>
> Note: you may run into the situation where the unit
> has more than 12
> models making hitting the HQ impossible. This is
> done on purpose since I
> believe the odds of hitting a HQ unit in such a mob
> are too slim to
> represent. This benefits ork armies, but they need
> it since command and
> control is very critical to them in comparison with
> other armies.
>
> Second note: When attacked by a barrage attack
> resolve whether or not
> the HQ is in the blast the same way as with direct
> fire.
>
> If the HQ unit is not in unit coherency more than
> 6cm) but within
> command radius firing at HQ units is as follows:
>
> Units may only spot and fire at a command unit if
> they are with half the
> range of the firing units weapon. This is because
> its hard to spot a HQ
> unit on its own because they take great pains to
> hide/camoflague
> themselves. So the firing unit needs to "creep in"
> to
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness
http://health.yahoo.com
Received on Sat Apr 27 2002 - 12:29:42 UTC