When you use a Squat engineer, you just simply lay down a barrage template next to him. That way it does not matter wether the building is occupied or not.
I would like to see them having the ability to destroy buildngs though, and not only affect them. Thats a thing for the Squat revision though...
Eivind
> Fra: "Tom Webb" <tom.webb_at_...>
> Dato: 2002/04/30 Tue PM 01:03:29 CEST
> Til: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> Emne: RE: [NetEpic ML] RE: [v5.0] Buildings and fortifiactions
>
> I like this one, pretty good idea. Squat demolition teams, the only problem
> being is technically they can only demolish unoccupied buildings and what
> would be the point in that?
>
>
>
>
>
> "Millett, George" <George.Millett_at_...> on 30/04/2002 12:05:39
>
> Please respond to netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
>
> To: "'netepic_at_yahoogroups.com'" <netepic_at_yahoogroups.com>
> cc:
>
> Subject: RE: [NetEpic ML] RE: [v5.0] Buildings and fortifiactions
>
>
> Hmm, what about a stand of Human Bombs running into a
> building and going boom from the inside? That would
> certainly make a big dent!
>
> Wouldn't it be easier to add something similar to the engineer
> classification as only chaos and the Imperium really make use of human
> bombs where as it is very easy to imagine squads of squats swarming over
> large buildings attaching High Ex to the structural pillars etc and maybe
> allow an "am I standing in a safe place" roll to represent the engineer
> knowing where the explosive is but still allowing a chance of being
> accidentally caught in the blast zone.
>
> G
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Kerry [mailto:steve_kerry_uk_at_...]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 11:13 AM
> To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] RE: [v5.0] Buildings and fortifiactions
>
>
> I think the idea of damaged buildings that may or may
> not fall down each turn is excellent! Rubble counters
> could be used, or dice sitting on the roof to show how
> many points of damage each one has taken. Keeping
> track on bits of paper should be avoided at all costs.
>
> When a building does fall, it spreads debris over a
> large area and can sometimes knock other buildings
> down as a result (there was a gruesome example in New
> York where the twin towers fell straight down rather
> than toppling over, but took several more buildings
> with them anyway). Certainly any infantry or vehicles
> adjacent to a collapsing building would be wiped out.
>
> Any large gun should be able to damage a building, but
> it needs to be an artillery piece not a bolter or
> lasgun. Thudd guns would be ideal for demolishing
> office blocks! I can't see how a Vindicator could
> fail to blow holes in a fortress or bunker, either.
> Perhaps the requirement is for artillery or vehicle
> mounted guns rather than hand-held weapons? TSM's
> would still be relevant as some guns are bigger and
> noisier than others.
>
> Hmm, what about a stand of Human Bombs running into a
> building and going boom from the inside? That would
> certainly make a big dent!
>
> Infantry defending a building should certainly gain an
> advantage from outside attackers, as they are
> defending a fortified position. But only the
> attackers are also inside the building, neither side
> would gain much of an advantage over the other.
>
> Just some thoughts to encourage discussion...
>
> Steve
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Everything you'll ever need on one web page
> from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
> http://uk.my.yahoo.com
>
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ************************************************************
> This email has originated from a shared mail relay station for Bull
> Information Systems Ltd (Registration No: 2017873) and Integris Ltd (a
> Steria company, Registration No: 2706218).
>
> Privileged, confidential and/or copyright information may be contained in
> this email, and is only for the use of the intended addressee. To copy,
> forward, disclose or otherwise use it in any way if you are not the
> intended recipient or responsible for delivering to him/her is prohibited.
>
> If you receive this email by mistake, please advise the sender immediately,
> by using the reply facility in your email software.
>
> We may monitor the content of emails sent and received via our network for
> the purposes of ensuring compliance with policies and procedures.
>
> This message is subject to and does not create or vary any contractual
> relationships between Bull Information Systems Ltd or Integris Ltd.
>
> Both offices registered at: Computer House, Great West Road, Brentford,
> Middlesex, TW8 9DH
> *************************************************************
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
Received on Tue Apr 30 2002 - 12:53:13 UTC