[v5.0] Buildings and fortifiactions

From: Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...>
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 16:42:14 -0400

Hi!

Unlike, the previous parts of the review where I listed what was in the
book I will engage in free form discussion of these topics because the
amount of rewording/mistakes/changes is so high that a re-write is need.

I am dissatisfied with the current building rules due to the following
factors:

1. It's all or nothing. Either it falls on a failed save or it doesn't.
There is no "in between". Buildings don't always just fall or stand they
get slowly pounded into rubble by artillery of pounded somewhat faster
by more specialized artillery.

2. There is no defensive bonus for being in a building. You can assault
a defensive structure but there is no "benefit" for the defending unit
to be in the building CAF don't change. It's the same odds out in the
open as in a building.

3. How do you hit a building? There are no clear and fast rules. IS it a
regular to hit? Is there a bonus? When you hit a building with units
inside can you hit the building or the units? Or both? Too many
unanswered questions.

4. How much "protection" does a structure afford? IS the "to hit"
penalty enough? Or is something more needed?

5. As they stand the siege rules are incomplete. Granted siege games are
not that common, but it IS common to use a bunker or two as objectives,
so we need to define those rules better so as to use in regular games.

The current rules where instituted in version 3.0. They were an offshoot
of the AT rules. It's a shame I did not "push" the issue more and just
adopted those rules in total. They answer quite a few questions. Note,
that I'm not proposing new rules the AT rules are the oldest rules for
epic and their rules have about 14 years of testing. I will first
mention the rules then what "patching" we may add.

Buildings

In AT terms all structures had a "damage rating" basically hit points or
damage points. We can call then "structural points". The saves we keep
as we have them know, on 2d6. A failed save usually subtracts ONE
structural point. Some artillery (namely siege artillery like griffons
and bombards) do more structural damage per failed save than standard
artillery.

Here are some examples of what building saves and structural points
could be:

1. Wood/adobe/ non-concrete or steel structures (i.e Orks huts). Save-
9+ on 2d6, 1-2 structural points

2. concrete, steel re-enforced (i.e standard imperial building). Save 6+
on 2d6, 3 structural points.

3. Fortifications- varies (will cove this separately after basic
building rules).

Artillery Barrages

All artillery barrages do one point of structural damage per failed
save. Some units like the bombard (d6 points) and griffon (d3 points) do
more. On average it will take 3 turns to reduce a standard imperial
building to rubble. It will take a lot less with heavier artillery, but
it's still unpredictable since it's not a fixed amount.

Probability of collapse

As buildings suffer damage they may collapse. Even without further
firing at them. This is due to the damage suffered might be greater than
expected. In every end phase roll a d6 for every building that has been
damaged (doesn't matter when the damage occurred). If the die roll is
equal to or less than the amount of structural points a building has
suffered it collapses prematurely.

Example: An Imperial building is hit by a basilisk barrage and fails its
save and takes one structural point of damage. It now has two points
left. In the end phase roll a d6. If a one is rolled the building
collapses (since the roll is equal to the amount of points it suffered
[one]). If a 2+ was rolled the building remains standing.

This introduces some uncertainty, since you are now gambling to see if
the building will stay "up" or not.

Hitting buildings

IN the old days you got a bonus, in net epic terms let's keep it simple
and say a building is hit by any weapon on a roll of 2+. Let's face it,
its improbable that a building will not be hit if someone wishes it to
target it. Besides not all weapons can harm buildings so it only really
affects those that can. Hitting a building is not the crucial points,
it's the save. So hitting should be easy, but failing the save harder.

Hitting buildings with troops inside

This question is pretty common, what do I hit? The building? The troops?
Or both?. For direct fire weapons (non-artillery barrages) the player
should nominate that the target is the troops OR the building. Most of
the time it's moot since most direct fire cannot harm the building, but
for those cases it does the player must choose. Of course either course
of action has its benefits of drawbacks (hitting the building is easy,
but it has a high saving throw; hitting the troops is hard, but usually
not save).

Barrages always hit the building (it's inevitable) and the troops inside
(as per barrage points and cover modifiers).

Assaulting buildings

Although common sense says some units just can't assault troops in a
building it does not specifically say who can or can't. Therefore we
must note what structures (and who can assault them). For example only
infantry should be allowed to attack in close combat other infantry in
buildings. On the other hand assaulting a trench, one can add more
eligible units.

Units like titans or knights with close combat weapons can damage
buildings automatically being in base-to-base contact with them.

That's the basics, pretty simple, much more informative and direct than
what we have now. What follows are some of the "perks" I came up with.

Defense against assault

As it stands, there is no point beyond the cover modifier to hit, to
actually defend a structure versus close combat. There is not benefit
for being "dug-in" and receive a charge. We already have a dug-in order
but its worth is dubious. So let's change what a "dug-in order can do:

1. A dug in order may only be placed on a detachment that is currently
within a structure or some sort (building, trench, etc). The dug in
order affords the detachment a bonus in close combat and firing in the
first fire phase. Note these bonuses ONLY apply if the unit has these
orders. Detachments engaged in structures on any other orders DO NOT
receive these bonuses. This adds a tactical benefit to assaulting units
in structures BEFORE they consolidate, just like in real life.

The CAF bonuses are as follows:

+1 for defending in "light" structures (wood/adobe/non-concrete)
+2 for defending in "medium" structures (like standard imperial
buildings).
+3 for defending in "heavy" structures (like fortifications).

Assault categories

This is not so much a category as a widening definition of existing
definitions. They refer to the units "ability" to engage units in
structures.

1. Excels at assault- these are units like the combat engineers where
they negate the effects of the "dug-in" order. There are not many units
like this and gives units like combat engineers added significance.

2. Standard- these are the bulk or the units. They can assault but have
to special bonuses or penalties. Dug-in counter bonuses apply as normal.

2. Poor at assault- these units are just no good in an assault. They
either can't assault (artillery) or very bad at it (vehicles) or too big
(titans). These units only recourse is too reduce the structures by
firepower.

As you can infer you don't have to add anything to the units description
since "artillery" will already define its assault capability, just as
much as "infantry" or the "vehicle" designation will.

And that's it! Pretty concise and simple.

Comments?

Peter
Received on Sun Apr 28 2002 - 20:42:14 UTC