Re: [Epic] "FIREPOWER" and Blast Markers

From: Thane Morgan <thane_at_...>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 17:17:49 -0600

DeconSolo_at_... wrote:

> 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

I like the idea of weaker armor taking BMs' first. The other posibility is laying
BM's on the models closest to the unit firing at them. This would mean keeping the
BM's laid by each unit a bit separate, unless comming from nearly the same
direction. A unit might have 3 BM's on the forward arc and 2 on the left side, so
units closest to those edges suffer the suppression before more central units.
Doesn't help WE's at all, but would addt a bit more realism. May also be confusing
as hell.

Thane
Received on Fri Sep 11 1998 - 23:17:49 UTC