Re: [Epic] roolzboyz: close combat weapons and holofields

From: David Lado <lado_at_...>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 10:25:34 -0400

>> The point that is being
>>debated is that the auto-destroy is not a hit.
>
>Of course but you need a HIT to cause the auto-destroy.
>
>> As a matter of fact,
>>a titan does not need to score a hit at all to destroy with a CC
>>weapon;
>
>Sorry but I can't see how you can destroy a titan with a CC weapon
>without striking him... I see where's the problem, we don't have
>the same definition for a HIT. For me, a HIT (a "touche" in French)
>is something which causes damage to a unit.
>For example :

The way I define a hit is beating the targets armor with a hit
roll. In the example you give (Land raiders shooting and CC),
units roll dice to beat the opponents armor (or in the case of
CC, to roll above a predetermined number). You don't have to
make any such roll to use a CC weapon. As a matter of fact,
the way the rules read now, you can fail to score a hit and
still destroy the enemy titan. Likewise, if you lose the CC,
you can any number of hits with a CC weapon and not get the
auto-destroy. Whether or not you score a HIT doesn't enter
into the equation, it's a seperate issue.

I agree that titan would be physically striking the other titan,
but that has nothing to do with the rules, it's just fluff (and
you could make up fluff to justify why holofields wouldn't help
in this situation). What matters is what the rules specifically
say, and what they say is simply that the titan suffers catastrophic
damage. They don't say "any hits caused by a CC weapon cause
catastrophic damage". It might be that this is what the authors
intended, but it's not what they rules say. By analogy, a unit
that retreats from combat but is caught (i.e. within 15 cm of an
enemy) is destroyed, even though no unit scored a HIT on it.

David
Received on Tue Jul 29 1997 - 14:25:34 UTC