Re: [Epic] [Epic40k] Blast Markers and Firepower

From: David Dresser <lemming_at_...>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 18:26:25 -0700

duckrvr_at_... wrote:
>
> At 09:26 AM 6/12/97 -0700, you wrote:
>
> >[example: 4fp at 90cm and 16fp at 45cm will become 20fp at 45cm when the
> >detachment collects 4 BMs. I suppose the 4fp could still be fired up to
> >90cm for the purposes of placing BMs on opposing detachments, but with
> >no possibility of causing hits]
>
> No, that's not right. In your example, you still have 4fp at 90cm and 16fp
> at 45cm. You first allocate the fp as you wish. As an example, we'll say 4
> fp at a valuable unit at 60cm, and the rest at a unit at 30cm. Then you
> allocate BMs. In this case, 2 to the close unit, due to the 16fp, and a
> possible one for the long unit, pending any casualties (the 1-7 fp result).
> Then you subtract effective fp due to BMs (or assault orders). Let's use 5
> BMs as a number. To subtract them, I would take all of them from the 16fp
> block, because I want to inflict as much damage as possible to the farther
> unit (or I wouldn't have fired at it to begin with). That leaves 4fp at
> long range and 11fp on the close unit. Then you calculate dice and roll to
> hit. If you damage the far unit, you have to remember to go back and place
> a BM.
>
> So that's:
> 1) assign FP
> 2) assign BMs (to target unit)
> 3) reduce FP for assault orders or BMs on firing unit
> 4) calculate dice and roll for casualties
>
> Now, if all the target units were more than 45cm away in our example, then
> you could only assign 4 fp (the long range ones). That means when you
> reduced effective fp by 5, you could inflict no casualties.
>
> Does that clarify suppression effects? Or does it make it incredibly confusing?
>
> Temp

Thanks, that's a good explanation of how BMs and FP are supposed to work
now.

However, my example (and the whole message) were on the topic of a
suggested rules change which boils down to "subtract BMs from the FP
every time you fire the detachment at a different target (every time you
calculate fp)". I think that my example was accurate for that purpose.

-Lemm
Received on Fri Jun 13 1997 - 01:26:25 UTC