Re: [Epic] Tactic Critique

From: Chris White <chris_at_...>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 16:58:49 -0700

At 06:04 PM 7/24/97 -0400, you wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Many thanks for the list. But I've never understood what's
>> unclear about disruption weapons. Isn't Disrupt listed on the Super
>> Heavy Weapons list? So doesn't it follow that they would use the
>> Super Heavy Weapon BM table? I don't remember reading anything about
>> the Disrupt weapon that would suggest otherwise.
>>
>> Mark
>
>I could be just being too literal, I guess (I do that sometimes), but
>"hits" to me might indicate either: any succesful roll with a weapon, or a
>hit in the sense of firepower hits; that is, a hit that removes the unit
>unless it saves. Disrupt weapons would not score hits in this second sense,
>so if 1-3 of them were firing, they might only place as many disrupt
>counters as they rolled 4,5, or 6's.
>
>I did not mean to imply that it was unclear whether disrupt weapons use the
>superheavy weapon chart for blast markers; I'm just not totally sure
>whether, if a single disrupt weapon succeeds in it's roll, one blast marker
>or two blast markers are placed (one from the weapon, and possibly one for
>scoring a hit as according to the SHW blast marker table).
>
>Eugene
>
>
        Well it's good to know I'm not he only one confused by the BM caused by
disrupt weapons...

        I find it hard to believe that a Monofilament cloud from a Doomweaver(?),
for example, does NO DAMAGE to the target detachment and only makes it
harder for the target to get their act together, so to speak.
Received on Thu Jul 24 1997 - 23:58:49 UTC