Re: [Epic] Net Epic - shooting at chargers

From: nethol <nethol_at_...>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 13:54:58 +0200

----------
> From: Jason Robinson <ewing_at_...>
> To: space-marine_at_...
> Subject: Re: [Epic] Net Epic - shooting at chargers
>
> On Fri, 7 Feb 1997, nethol wrote:
> > 1. Defensive fire to chargers -is- snap-firing. If we modify to the
rules
> > such that every det with FF orders can snap-fire then we should also
> > eliminate this sort of def fire, which would be a redundancy, and
replace
> > it with snap-fire. Actually, it would be more logical since a det snap
> > firing the charging det cannot fire at any others (by the existing
rules,
> > the individual stands that are not in actual base-to-base contact, ie
in
> > CC, -can- fire at other targets), while being able to combine fire
against
> > attackers ('free' stands can shoot them as well, which is what happens
in
> > 'real life' anyway). The defending unit should have the right to
snap-fire
> > at any stage of the charger's movement until the last stand is moved
(even
> > if, by then some of the stands might be in b-to-b contact).
> > 2. I think you should give any order you like, so long as the stands
> > engaged in CC doesn't shoot.
> > 3. While on the subject of charging, I would like to introduce one of
our
> > house rules here. "Transports and infantry in mixed detachments (eg SM
> > tactical or terminator, or Evil Sunz Clan) can be given different
orders so
> > long as they differ just by one degree (that is FF&A or C&A but not
FF&C)
> > and the formation rules are obeyed". The logic behind this can be
readily
> > understood watching the "real life" troops disembarking from their
> > transports under fire. The weapon mounts on the transport opens fire on
> > defending positions covering for the troops disembarking by stages.
This
> > modification eliminates situations where giving your Terminators charge
> > orders prevents their Land Raiders from shooting (while their CAF is
much
> > lower, and fire power considerably higher). It also enables the
> > transportees to defend their advancing vehicles in CC, if charged by
the
> > enemy. Suppose you are a trooper: do you just sit in your personnel
carrier
> > and wait to be butchered while attacked by charging infantry, just
because
> > your carrier "doesn't move fast enough" or "preparing to shoot" (that
is in
> > advance orders)?
>
> Great ideas, Peter take note! I still think that a normal unit
> snap firing at a moving enemy unit should get a minus to their shot. Or
> at least defending units snap firing at charging units (not necessarely
> charging at them) should get a minus.
>
> - Jason
I agree. Let's say -1 (common infantry needs 6+ to hit in a D6), except for
specialized snap-fire weapons (they are assumed to have sophisticated
target tracking devices like todays Oerlikon AA etc).
How about devising (or naming) a couple of titan snap-fire weapons as well?

S. Birol Akmeric

nethol_at_...
Received on Fri Feb 07 1997 - 11:54:58 UTC