RE: [NetEpic ML] Re: The close combat issue.

From: darius spano <dmanspano_at_...>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 18:21:52 -0700 (PDT)

Peter,
I think you had the gist of it in your summary. CC
should be finished in the turn it started if possible.
Units involved in CC that survive the initial CC
should be allowed to move up to 1/2 their movement to
the nearest enemy or choose to retreat. No morale
checks just go at them if you can or regroup if you
can. With regards to vehicles that survive CC I think
they should be able to move up to 1/2 to do the same.
I don't think landraiders want to be bogged down with
troops. Of course if the vehicle itself is pinned then
it can do the same as troops. The subsquent CC that
takes place would count as a first combat (2d6 each
combatant) unless more than 1 unit was able to attack
the unit. This in itself will help speed up the game
because CC can take one turn opposed to the 2 and 3
turns it usually takes and really makes you think
before commiting more units to an assault. To me this
makes more sense than rolling 2d6 or checking morale
at the end of the turn. Usually after a squad takes
serious loses after CC they are close to broken unless
a mob army like the orks. And after CC the survivors
may get mowed down anyway. Our 3000 pt games can be
over in an hour.
Darius
--- Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Explained in words, yes, it gets long. I imagine the
> "execution" and it
> seems "simple". Of course, simplicity is in the eye
> of the beholder.
>
> To be frank, I gave up on trying adding certain
> things like suppression
> of more decisive close combat some time ago. Mainly
> because I think the
> core mechanics are not robust enough to handle it.
> Keep in mind all that
> netepic has changed and it has accommodated it all,
> which is amazing,
> but some things require too big a change. Now you
> can understand why
> Heresy II was designed, sometimes you need to start
> from scratch to
> include certain game concepts.
>
> IMO, what I really would like to add to epic is a
> "pushback" rule for
> close combat. Problem is there are many variables to
> factor in "one
> roll" that make it difficult. Using morale may be
> good, but morale
> values are too "extreme" (marines) are too crappy
> (IG,orks) and you find
> that armies with good morale would be too good. The
> other problem is
> number which requires all sorts of
> formulas/counting/modifiers to make
> it work. I figure we know what we want and what
> variables to include,
> but it's difficult to come up with something
> "simple".
>
> I think Eivind is right, some things are better left
> alone.
>
> Peter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: AntiChrist [mailto:seimejote_at_...]
> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 12:39 PM
> To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [NetEpic ML] Re: The close combat issue.
>
> Isn't that _more_ complicated? :P
>
> --- In netepic_at_yahoogroups.com, "Peter Ramos"
> <primarch_at_c...> wrote:
> > Alternate idea for close combat
> >
> > Close combat will remain the same up until the
> point the first turn
> of
> > close combat ends. At this point all unpinned
> surviving models will
> roll!
> > for morale (once per the detachment involved).
> Those that make the
> roll
> > can make a 5cm move and re-engage in close combat
> and fight ONE
> turn and
> > ONE turn ONLY or additional close combat. Bonuses
> from outnumbering
> in
> > the previous turn do not "carry over" to this
> "extra" turn of close
> > combat. Once this additional turn is done each
> SIDE (meaning each
> > opposing player) rolls 2d6 and will add or
> subtract the following:
> >
> > +1 for every casualty inflicted on the opponent in
> close combat
> > +1 if you out number your opponent by less than 2
> to 1
> > +2 if you outnumber you opponent between 2 to 1,
> but less than 3 to
> 1,
> > add +1 for every interval the ratio increases (+3
> if outnumbers more
> > than 3 to 1, but less than 4 to 1, etc.).
> > +1 for every elite detachment on your side
> > -1 if opponent has units that cause fear.
> > -1 opponent in cover (any terrain feature that
> confers a -1 penalty
> to
> > firing)
> > -2 opponent in building (and you are not, if both
> in terrain feature
> > then NO bonus).
> > -3 opponent in fortification
> >
> > The loser of roll retreats all his forces from
> close combat a
> number of
> > cm's equal to his modified roll, or if preferred a
> flat 10cm.
> >
> > We'll commence poking holes through this, since I
> know I must have
> > forgotten something.
> >
> > Peter
>
>
>
> 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 Tue May 20 2003 - 01:21:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 10:59:54 UTC