| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Laying a BM using small arms? http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=14905 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Man of kent [ Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Laying a BM using small arms? |
My unit has no ranged weaponry other than 'small arms: 15cm' no AP or AT value etc. Can it still be used to get within 15cm and 'shoot' in order to lay a BM before an assault? |
|
| Author: | Man of kent [ Thu Feb 19, 2009 9:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Laying a BM using small arms? |
Sorted. |
|
| Author: | Lord Inquisitor [ Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Laying a BM using small arms? |
Hena is right, there's an FAQ on it: Q: Can a formation with units armed only with weapons that are Small Arms fire at an enemy formation to place a Blask Marker on them ? A: No. As the rules currently stand, units armed only with Small Arms cannot shoot and therefore can't place a BM on an enemy for causing them to 'come under fire'. This doesn't really make sense to me from a realism perspective (20 bolters would probably have a fairly equivalent effect as 4 heavy bolters on a tank), and it really doesn't gel with the suppression FAQ from a game-play perspective - if they're not shooting then why on earth can they count as being suppressed? |
|
| Author: | Morgan Vening [ Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | Laying a BM using small arms? |
Quote: (Lord Inquisitor @ 19 Feb. 2009, 21:59 ) Hena is right, there's an FAQ on it: Q: Can a formation with units armed only with weapons that are Small Arms fire at an enemy formation to place a Blask Marker on them ? A: No. As the rules currently stand, units armed only with Small Arms cannot shoot and therefore can't place a BM on an enemy for causing them to 'come under fire'. This doesn't really make sense to me from a realism perspective (20 bolters would probably have a fairly equivalent effect as 4 heavy bolters on a tank), and it really doesn't gel with the suppression FAQ from a game-play perspective - if they're not shooting then why on earth can they count as being suppressed? That was one of the hardest things to get my head around with Epic. The weirdness of some of the abstractions. Example - Marine Scout Squad w Rhinos (4BM) Within 15cm of target. Rhinos behind Scouts = 4 Shots. Rhinos in front of Scout = 2 Shots. Within 15cm of Armoured Vehicle. Shooting = 1BM, no chance of casualty. Engaging = 4x5+, 2x6+ to inflict wounds. Example - Tactical Squad (transported) w Rhinos + Hunter (6BM) Aircraft within 15cm Hunter closest = AA shot. Hunter not closest = no AA shot. I understand how it works for game balance, but it definitely breaks into WTF territory when regarding 'reality'. Morgan Vening |
|
| Author: | pixelgeek [ Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Laying a BM using small arms? |
Quote: (Lord Inquisitor @ 19 Feb. 2009, 13:59 ) This doesn't really make sense to me from a realism perspective ... The game abstracts small arms into a group of weapons that is only usable in assaults. You draw a line somewhere and sometimes it doesn't make sense literally. The problem comes about IMO from then allowing these non-firing weapons to soak up suppression. |
|
| Author: | alansa [ Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | Laying a BM using small arms? |
Quote: (pixelgeek @ 20 Feb. 2009, 02:07 ) Quote: (Lord Inquisitor @ 19 Feb. 2009, 13:59 ) This doesn't really make sense to me from a realism perspective ... The game abstracts small arms into a group of weapons that is only usable in assaults. You draw a line somewhere and sometimes it doesn't make sense literally. The problem comes about IMO from then allowing these non-firing weapons to soak up suppression. I'd agree, allowing small arms to soak up suppression just muddies the water. |
|
| Author: | Carrington [ Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Laying a BM using small arms? |
Quote: (alansa @ 20 Feb. 2009, 10:54 ) Quote: (pixelgeek @ 20 Feb. 2009, 02:07 ) Quote: (Lord Inquisitor @ 19 Feb. 2009, 13:59 ) This doesn't really make sense to me from a realism perspective ... The game abstracts small arms into a group of weapons that is only usable in assaults. You draw a line somewhere and sometimes it doesn't make sense literally. The problem comes about IMO from then allowing these non-firing weapons to soak up suppression. I'd agree, allowing small arms to soak up suppression just muddies the water. In terms of reality, it makes some sense. In general, for various reasons, Squad automatic weapons/support weapons tend to be the last weapons silenced in combat |
|
| Author: | vytzka [ Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Laying a BM using small arms? |
There's also the aspect of antiaircraft - if the only weapons suppressed were those that were able to hurt the target, it would be vastly easier to silence flak. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|