I agrre suppression is tough use unless certain
weapons automatically force a suppression test, ie;
Squat Goliath Mega Cannons, Earth shakers and even
vibro cannons. If it is to beincorporated it must be
simple.
The group I game with made our own CC rules where
remaining units are paired off if within 5cm of an
enemy. Any paired units would be in CC the next turn
and couldn't be targeted in ADV. Fire unless "cold
blooded" armies.
If 6 orks boyz s 10 IG tac trooper stands and 2 ork
stands survive and 6 IG stands survive, who has won?
Both lost 4 stands. In this case I would think the
orks would have to take a morale check to continue the
CC into the next turn or fallback and wait for
reinforcements. The IG tac squad has taken 40%
casualties and are not broken. I think they should
make a morale check as well to see if they stand and
fight, chase the green skins, or make a defensive
retreat. This check would look like this for the orks
and IG since they have soimilar morale.
CC morale result roll
1 Defensive Retreat
2 Stand and fight
3 Chase the enemy down
4-6 Passed morale may choose from 1-3
With this both sides must make a morale check after
CC. Of course this is affected when a unit is broken.
This also reflects higher morale units like Space
Marines and Squats, where they can only retreat, stand
and fight or chase the enemy dowm.
Units that have to retreat do so at normal movement
after CC has finished. Units that can chase will do so
at normal movement. Units who choose to stand and
fight may move up to half of their normal movement to
engage enemy units for CC the next turn (locked in
combat). Something like this may be the answer.Not
dificult and doesn't slow the game down too much.
Darius
--- eivind.borgeteien_at_... wrote:
> I have a nagging suspicion that supression and such
> CC rules are very hard to introduce under the
> Netepic rules. Its hard to get them ballanced.
>
> I picture an orkmob ganging up on a detachment of
> SM. One would expect that the orks lost a couple of
> more units than the SM. I cant really picture an
> intire orkmob withdrawing just because it has lost 5
> or 6 stands of a mob perhaps containing over 20.
>
> Eivind
> >
> > Fra: <jyrki.saari_at_...>
> > Dato: 2003/05/19 Mon PM 12:40:32 CEST
> > Til: <netepic_at_yahoogroups.com>
> > Emne: RE: RE: [NetEpic ML] Digest Number 1216
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ext [mailto:eivind.borgeteien_at_...]
> > > Sent: 19 May, 2003 13:36
> > > To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: RE: RE: [NetEpic ML] Digest Number 1216
> > >
> > >
> > > I can see your point regarding the psychological
> situation.
> > > But I dont think we should aply combat effects
> from CC only
> > > and neglect the shooting part.
> Pinning/supression would be fine.
> > >
> >
> > With that I agree wholeheartedly. However, the
> last time suppression was discussed it went down the
> drain for just the same reason CC did: too unfair
> for low morale troops. I made a set of suppression
> rules which did not use morale but a kind of blast
> marker (I can hear the flamethrowers warming up).
> The rules were published in a back issue of incoming
> (9 I think, the last article. It is there even
> though it doesn't show in the TOC) but like every
> other article in incoming it has been silenced to
> death, eg. no comments whatsoever. :o(
> >
> >
> > > Eivind
> >
> > Jyrki Saari
> >
> >
> > 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/
> >
> >
> >
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com
Received on Mon May 19 2003 - 12:37:39 UTC