[NetEpic ML] Re: APC and infantry saves
--- In netepic_at_egroups.com, Warprat <warprat_at_j...> wrote:
Hi All!
Bail-out procedure:
1) Resolve the Bail-out, on a 4+, using the Save Mod of the weapon.
1A) If the vehicle was destoyed by a barrage, troops that have
succesfully Bailed-out, must make a save against the barrage.
2) If the Bail-out is failed, apply the same weapon attack to the
troops
inside the vehicle.
What does everyone else think?
Warprat ;)
---->Thanks all for the great thoughts - lots of the ideas sound
great, howsabout (blatantly stolen/modified from everyone's posts):
Bail-out Procedure:
1) If a transport on the ground is destroyed by a weapon that can be
saved against, each transported stand gets a "bail-out save",
modified as follows:
1a) Base save is 4+, modified by the save mod of the attacking
weapon.
1b) Transported stands with inherent saves get their own saves in
addition if the first roll is failed. Again, the save is modified by
the save mod of the attacking weapon.
1bb)Exception: Units with inherent fixed saves do not take the
modifiers for the attacking weapon.
2) Units which survive bail-out are placed as close as possible to
the transport model (usually base-to-base). Units which find
themselves under a template as a result(barrages, flame templates,
etc) are immediately rolled for as targets for the template,
following the normal rules for that attack type.
3) Other special saves, such as Space Marine Medics, can then be
checked for as normal, regardless of what stage of the process
destroyed the stand.
3b) Special saves that save a vehicle after the fact, such as Space
Marine Techmarines, are taken after all other checks. If a transport
is saved in this manner, it does *not* help the transported troops.
(The TM save represents after-the-fact repairs - which may include
hosing out the interior...)
Sound OK? I specified "transports on the ground" to allow guys in an
already landed drop pod, Thunderhawk, etc. to have a chance, but if
it's destroyed in the air, sorry...
And here I thought it'd be a simple rule... :) Gotta cover
contingencies tho'! :)
Jim
Thanks again for all the replies&thoughts!
Received on Mon Apr 03 2000 - 12:06:22 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Tue Oct 22 2019 - 10:58:56 UTC