RE: [NetEpic ML] Heresy Rules Query

From: Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 16:23:09 -0400

Hi!

-----Original Message-----
From: Weasel Fierce [mailto:weasel_fierce_at_...]
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 12:27 PM
To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [NetEpic ML] Heresy Rules Query



>The morale rules in Heresy are quite detailed and robust so I don't
have
>to change anything about them to add the scheme. Instead of automatic
>activations you would roll to see if the battlegroup can act. The
>formula is simple:

This seems pretty cool...and pretty much inspired by the proposed things
for
Epic Armageddon eh ? :)

----> <grin> Yes. I soon as I saw the idea I knew I could use it in
Heresy easily.

Let me get something straight though...

In 1 turn, you do get to test for all units right ? Its just a matter of
how
many you can move before its the opponents turn...or ?

It will be alternating. For example, lets say you have a SM commander
with 5 battlegroups. In you're turn you will activate as many as you
think the odds will let you, keeping in mind that failed attempts will
cost you some fire power. Once you fail to activate or "pass" the other
player will go and do the same. Play alternates until there are no more
eligible units to activate. This way neither you nor you're opponent
will know what exactly will respond when you need it until the moment of
truth. Ultimate fog of war. Of course you can take the safe route and
activate ONE battlegroup and then pass the turn without attempting to
activate more. Armies like orks and IG will need to do this since
multiple activations in one turn are hard for them and they will lose to
much firepower if too many units fail. Also this lends to units like
commissars a special significance since due to their leadership bonus
they can extract a higher degree of compliance from their units than
standard IG leaders. Therefore you will see them in the thick of battle
making sure those units "respond" (can you hear the sound of bolters
dispensing "incentives"?).

Keep in mind that leader can command up to their leadership skill in
battle groups. So armies with real good commanders like SM can lead more
groups, but the tradeoff is each group is small. Conversely the IG will
lead fewer groups (a standard commander has a leadership of 3), but each
group is HUGE! So basically it's the big and ponderous meats the small
and quick. A SM commander will need to activate more units in a turn to
get things done in comparison with IG that can get things done slowly.

I still have to work out some things, but the basic fundamentals seem
sound.

Peter
Received on Fri May 24 2002 - 20:23:09 UTC