Not really this is a templete 12cms big it covers a Imperator very easy, so in fact with out sheilds it will hit the whole Titan. Since the weapon ignors cover mods it hits on normal roll. Now if you were firing a normal weapon at them then you would have to apply fortification mods to them so -2 to hit and they would save on a 4+ unless they have a better save.
Example: Squad of Bad Moon Boyz fire at IG inside a leg of an Imperator with sheilds down, they need a 5+ to hit -2 for cover now they need to roll 7+ roll one d6 then another d6 needing 4,5 or6 to make 7,8 or 9, say 4 hit at -2 TSM, Now the IG troops inside the Imperator need only to roll 4+ to save instead of no save. but if the weapon were a Scorcher then they would only need 4+ to hit, and the troops would not get the 4+ save. This type weapon ignores cover mods.
----- Original Message -----
From: quester
To: netepic_at_egroups.com
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 8:31 AM
Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] Imperator troops, save vs Squat rad bomb
My Groups | netepic Main Page | Start a new group!
Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...> wrote:
hi All
The point is there are no cover mods on the troops in a veh. or titans and its not a "non moving building" its a titian. its hard to hit the head of a titan let alone a gun port .Punch the armor and kill the troops its all in the damage lists they take the gun ports (openings) into account and theres a lower armor save, its easy to get a troop hit if you can hit the right place on the titan we don t need more rules to replace the ones that work. just the ones that don t .If you add this you have to change all the damage lists and armor saves the way you shoot at titans and on and on and on etc..... the troops and the titan would have to be two targets for all shooting .. this will get very messy
thank you
Quester
"Is it time to play?"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
Received on Thu Sep 14 2000 - 16:00:05 UTC