RE: [NetEpic ML] Re: [v5.0] Buildings and fortifiactions

From: Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...>
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 17:55:03 -0400

Hi!


I think this saves are too low... statistically if I shoot the
building with, say a detachment of Vypers I have a good probability
to take it down...

---->Too low? Realize that the great majority or artillery weapons have
a zero modifier. Meaning standard buildings with a 6 saves lose one
point of structure only 50% of the time. Remember it's a whole BATTERY
of units shooting at one structure, so that change is good enough. Also
its only one point most of the time, so the building will stand another
two points unless it fall prematurely which is a low probability (at
most 2 in 6). Also direct weapons DO NOT affect buildings; Vypers do
nothing to buildings (they are armed with shurikens). Even a volcano
cannon cannot knock down a building, it's to focused for structural
damage.

Proposal: a weapon does to a building as much structural damage as
its save modifier... so only heavy weapons can harm it (like Void
shields) and a Land Raider Lascannon does much damage than, say, a
Storm Bolter...

---->As I said above only barrage weapons have the area and power to
affect buildings, direct fire weapons cannot affect buildings. To equate
artillery saving throw modifier to points lost leaves it pretty much the
same way it is now since modifiers of basilisk and bombards are 2-/-3
there would be no variability with this either since you already know
before hand how much damage you can do. With the system as proposed you
NEVER know how many points you'll do for sure even with high damage
siege weapons since you can roll a "1".

Artillery does at least 1 structural damage, even if their save
modifier is 0, and some have their special rules (as written below)

With this in mind, I think that the buildings structural points have
to be at least doubled... and the saves left as the ones in the
actual rulebook (Imperial buildings save on 4+ on 2d6)

I have played quite a few siege games. The save of 4+ on 2d6 is reserved
for siege structures and is damn tough to beat. Note that even a bombard
at -3 against a fort will cause point loss only 50% of the time. That's
pretty steep for the BEST artillery there is. The saves proposed have
been tried and test and been fund accurate. It may be easier to knock
down buildings with siege equipment (ordinary buildings were not made to
withstand this type of punishment), but that's how it should be, siege
equipment is the pinnacle of this type of unit made to bust open bunkers
let alone a standard building.


IMHO, non-barrage weapons cannot target units in a buildings. If you
want to kill them, go catch them in CC or take down the building.

----> Disagree. In modern war it is typical to shoot direct fire weapons
at defender in buildings. It may not be effective (thus the -2 to hit)
but it is done.

Very good, agree. But don't add another order, simply state that
units with First Fire orders in a building are considered "dug-in"
and receive the bonus. We can even state that Elite assaulting units
cancel this bonus (another one for the Elite poll)!

----> That's a good point. One could use the same order and add in its
description the additional benefits when in defensive structures. There
are very few "excel" at assault units; perhaps elites should be this
good. It would certainly make them valuable and there is much precedent
on using "elite" troops for tough assaults.

Peter
Received on Sun Apr 28 2002 - 21:55:03 UTC