Re: [NetEpic ML] silly question?

From: (wrong string) � Benet <cibernyam_at_...>
Date: Wed Jun 14 11:58:05 2000

Well, I agree with somebody thinking that Snap Fire slows down the game
We don't use snap Fire at all, because it's also quite unbalancing for some
armies.
We use a house rule that states as follows:

When a stand is charged, and the detachment is on first fire orders, we
allow the WHOLE detachment to wait until the advance fire phase to shoot.
Units which fighted in close combat may still fire with a -1 penalty. Units
that tied close combat are not allowed to fire nor be fired upon.

BUT... after some games we found this rule a bit cheesy because after close
combat, even with a -1 penalty there was a certain tendency to fry the
winning charging units. Just imagine two Land speeder detachments on FF
orders being charged by a bloodlettrer and a beastmen detachment. If you FF
you'll kill some bloodletters and some beastmen, Next turn you'llhave to
face boh surviving bloodletters and surviving beastmen facing a sure kill of
your survivors. But if you FF against bloodletters and hold on vs. beastmen
your surviving stands can wipe out the rest of the bloodletters and face
only the beastmen.

So we decided to change the rule to give the -1 penalty to the WHOLE
detachment. Stands which tied CC are still not allowed to fire or be fired
upon.

With this rule we balanced the fact (as appointed in the first mail) that
some armies used suicide chargers to avoid multiple firer platforms to use
all their power. Imagine, a bad moon tower fully loaded (or a Predator
or...), charged by a stupid Rhino from a wiped out detachment (morale 2: who
cares about the fallen brothers?).

What do you think?
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
Received on Wed Jun 14 2000 - 11:58:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 10:59:03 UTC