[NetEpic ML] Re: R: heresy questions: replay 3

From: Peter Ramos <pramos2_at_...>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 17:56:37 -0600

Hi!


Hi!

>The only think I don't like is that if a unit is in command will receive
>automatically a leadership bonus for this
>This is the rule I devised the leader can only apply its leadersjip bonus
to a number of >units equal its leadership divided by 3 (round down). Thus a
commander with a 3 >leadership give their bonus to one unit per turn
(players choice). Higher leadership lets >you do it with more units.

Do you think that the unit/s that will receive this command bonus must be
selected at the start of the turn (so a counter need) or you let the player
choice the moment (very advantageous)?

>I can include a table to avoid doing the math. This represents that all
units may be >incontact with its commander and receive orders, but only a
few of those units get the >direct undivided attention and command resources
at a given time, thus the bonus. How >is that?

I agree for the limitation, but I think (only my personal opinion) that a
range restriction, also with this limit, can better simulate that a leader
must be associated to a unit to give some morale improvement.
Hmm.. how about a compromise let leader give their bonus at half their command range. I think better commanders should be able to gove their bonus at a greaater range than lesser commanders. Hows that?


>Hmmm.. well like I said the ordinance phase was originally there and now
I'm kinda >wondering about putting it back in. Now there is a danger about
putting it before >movement especially in the first turn before movement
since troops are all bunched up it >gives artillery too much advantage.
> then again that anomaly was in net epic. In Heresy line of sight and
spotting checks >reduce that danger. I'll repost how how this used to look
like and you give me your >opnion.

Infact this phase could be devasting and too advantageous for artillery
armies (IG, squats) that could fire most of their weapons before the other
army, but if you give this option only for indirect fire and give some
penalities, as the spotter and the batteries must be on prepared order etc.
this could, playtested, give new opportunities.
I thin this needs more thought. Tell you what why dont you playtest some of these ideas and get back to me with feedback before we try changing anything?

Three new questions (sorry):

Reading the air rules I judged that the ground strike resolution must be
resolved immediatelly when a bomber moves, is this correct or is only a
misinterpretation?
As per pages 17 and 19 in the core rules the attacks ocurr in th advance phase.

For firing purpose, must I trace the line of sight center to the center
between the firer and its target, as in net epic?
To keep it simple, yes.

You alse wrote that if the line of sight to the target is obstructed and you
don't see the 100% of the model, you must consider the target protected as
it would be in the same terrain that obstruct. Now, is there any limitation
about the percentage that you should see of the target, or you can shoot in
any case?
To keep it simple if less than 50% of the model is not seen then it can not be fired at. Anything short of this use the appropriate modeifer for the obscuring cover.

Also about firing again, I read that if a unit has different weapon systems
it can fires only one gender per phase, so I interpret that if I have a las
cannon (all purpose) and a heavy bolter (infantry only) I can shoot both if
they target infantries, is this correct?
No, you always choose which to fire, your anti-infantry weapons (heavy bolter) or your other weapons (all purpose and armor piercing). Note some skills permit you to shoot everything you'd like.

Thanks again for your help
My pleasure. I should begin editing to fit your suggestions this weekend.
Peter

Stefano
       
Received on Thu Feb 10 2000 - 23:56:37 UTC