Re: [NetEpic ML] Close Combat suggestion

From: cibernyam <cibernyam_at_...>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 15:51:12 +0200

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jarreas Underwood" <jarreas_at_...>
To: <netepic_at_yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 3:06 PM
Subject: [NetEpic ML] Close Combat suggestion


> After looking over both Epic:Armageddon and S.Montbert's proposals, I'd
like to make a few proposals myself.
>
> 1) No targeting restrictions on charging an enemy.

The only restriction applied up to now is about HQs which IMHO should not be
altered. Zones of control and other features are optional IIRC. Other
restrictions only depend on common sense and unit special rules.


>
> 2) Introduce Countercharge: after your enemy moves, any unengaged models
in the target detachment may make a 5 cm straight-line move to enter combat
with the unit that just charged. You can't go off and fight anyone else, but
this'll make up for having no targeting restrictions. If your enemy wants to
gang up on certain models he can, but the rest of your models still get to
join in.
>

I'm not for this. If your opponent gangs up on an enemy he will pay off in
the advance fire segment with a single barrage. Without changing the rules
there are plenty of tactics to counter gangups. Indeed, a single gang up is
a suicide tactic to bring down a key stand / vehicle sacrificing a whole
unit. In the other hand, this rule could be used in a cheesy way. Think of
charging different detachments, not charging a single infantry stand cause
it will trigger his whole detachment to countercharge. What about when two
different detachments charge? could you just countercharge the one that
charged your unit or you could charge the other one? Can you
countercountercharge? For me, no extra movements as a general rule. You lose
the initiave, you have disadvantadge for one turn. You have the iniative,
you rule.


> 3) Introduce after-combat move: after Close Combat is resolved, surviving
models that are not in base-to-base contact with the enemy may make a 5 cm
move. If they engage another enemy, resolve the combat normally next turn -
you can't fight your way across the board in one turn.
>

I remember trying this a long time ago as part of a house rule and it didn't
work quite well. The game gained speed and the battle became bloodier at the
cost of tactics and subtle game. A single surviving stand pinned whole units
in place, which in turn pinned other units and so on. The only chance to
allow a more tactic game was to allow splittering detachments (I mean,
ignoring coherency) if they had less than 50% of the remaining stands pinned
in CC. This resulted in losing all coherency and having bikes from the same
detachment in three diferent points in the battlefield, and having to lose
turns to regroup (not to say it was a mess). The way it is now is OK for me.
You fight a CC in the middle of nothing, you deserve getting fired in the
advance fire segment. You fight CC in cover, you avoid being shot at so
easily. Also, you will get the gangups you feared in the former point, when
a single surviving eldar stand is charged by three surviving IG stands to
avoid being shot at. Result: two inmobilised units the next turn and less
tactic chances.
Received on Tue Jul 20 2004 - 13:51:12 UTC