Re: [Epic] "FIREPOWER" and Blast Markers

From: <DeconSolo_at_...>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 14:57:39 EDT

In a message dated 9/10/98 13:41:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time, askinner_at_...
writes:

> Don't let out of range FP be "reduced" by BMs:
> Some devastators with some tactical marines in a detachment with BMs are
> shooting at targets at 40 cm range. The BMs make them ineffective. Then
> enemies wander into 30 cm, and suddenly the tactical marines can shoot, but
> ineffectively, and the devastators are effective at the same target.
>
> Let the out of range FP be reduced by BMs:
> Some devastators with BMs alone shooting at targets 40cm away are
> ineffective. But if we changed the detachment and added some tacticals, or
> even 15cm range assault marines, the same devastators would be effective.

The two examples are exactly why I have this conceptual problem with the way
BMs are used. Neither way really works (for me at least). There should be a
more detailed ruling as to what gets zapped by BM's first. I was in part
arguing that tanks in a combined arms group would ignore BM's first, but not
be immune. Lob enough shells at a division and it will eventually slow down,
but it's going to be the infantry that slow first. I dunno, this is one of
the things that I really dislike about E40K. Not the idea of BMs, but in how
they are used in the game. Also, one of the reasons why I try to stay out of
these discussions.

Perhaps something along the lines of Carl Billen's ideas? BTW- I like Mark's
(?) idea for using the Titan classes for that. Or just deduct FP from "soft"
units first, then "harder" targets? I dunno, I'm lousy with rules anyway...
                                                                              
Josh R
Received on Fri Sep 11 1998 - 18:57:39 UTC