Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
- No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
- Times and dates in your local timezone.
- Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
- Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
- Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/03 13:46:30
Subject: "Weapons Free" rule for split fire.
|
 |
Thrall Wizard of Tzeentch
|
This has probably been mooted in some form, but I'm struggling to think of a downside to this, so please poke holes and remind me why this hasn't been done!
Weapons Free
Any non-vehicle unit may split fire freely at a penalty of -1 BS for the entire unit.
Far more realistic, but might take longer to resolve I suppose. Good for short games.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/03 13:51:10
Subject: "Weapons Free" rule for split fire.
|
 |
Omnipotent Necron Overlord
|
IMO all heavy weapons of a different type should be able to engage a "preferred" target. I don't even seen the need for a -1 BS penalty. No reason to waste time splitting up your lasgun fire - but if you have 3 lascannons in a platoon who's job it is to take down enemy armor and they are shooting at grots...you have a system that forces you to waste fire. That sucks.
|
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/03 13:55:45
Subject: "Weapons Free" rule for split fire.
|
 |
Agile Revenant Titan
In the Casualty section of a Blood Bowl dugout
|
I also agree with this, I think it's a good rule as, like you say, it makes sense realistically as well as offers up chances for tactical flexibility in list building and play as well.
However, I think it may make things a little too slow and/or complicated, as well as making heavy weapons and units that can take lots of them (Devestators, Scourges etc) a little bit too overpowered. Perhaps it's better off limiting this to characters (who, after all, wouldn't necessarily follow commands given to/by the squad he's in) or perhaps saying that a unit can do this, at the penalty of the squad sergeant (which would be mandatory to have) not being able to fire (think Long Fangs - or at least how they worked in the old book, not sure if they still work like that).
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/03 14:00:15
Subject: "Weapons Free" rule for split fire.
|
 |
Xeno-Hating Inquisitorial Excruciator
|
I like the idea of squad sergeant being able to direct the squads heavier fire power. Really fluffy and a good system.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/03 14:41:11
Subject: "Weapons Free" rule for split fire.
|
 |
Painlord Titan Princeps of Slaanesh
|
Do longfangs retain fire discipline? Back in 5th ed i for a space wolf player who used 3 squads of long fangs to have 2 lascannons and 2 plasma cannons in each squad. He would pop a transport with the 2 lascannon and then fire discipline to get the other 2 plasma cannons to drop blast templates onto the disembarked squad. That is how split fire should be used.
On tanks, Space marines get PotMS to shoot 2 targets because the other side sponson cant get LoS to the target.
I think this split fire for other infantry should be an order so you do LD check.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/03 14:43:01
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/03 14:53:50
Subject: "Weapons Free" rule for split fire.
|
 |
The Last Chancer Who Survived
|
I'd add that rule to units with a character, for as long as the character is alive.
"Whilst this unit is led by a character, special/heavy weapons upgrades may fire at a separate target to the rest of the unit. Multiple special/heavy weapons do not have to fire at the same unit".
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/03 18:11:38
Subject: "Weapons Free" rule for split fire.
|
 |
Shas'ui with Bonding Knife
|
And then no one got into close combat ever again
|
Pit your chainsword against my chainsw- wait that's Heresy. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/03 18:48:04
Subject: "Weapons Free" rule for split fire.
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
The Shadow wrote:I also agree with this, I think it's a good rule as, like you say, it makes sense realistically as well as offers up chances for tactical flexibility in list building and play as well.
However, I think it may make things a little too slow and/or complicated, as well as making heavy weapons and units that can take lots of them (Devestators, Scourges etc) a little bit too overpowered. Perhaps it's better off limiting this to characters (who, after all, wouldn't necessarily follow commands given to/by the squad he's in) or perhaps saying that a unit can do this, at the penalty of the squad sergeant (which would be mandatory to have) not being able to fire (think Long Fangs - or at least how they worked in the old book, not sure if they still work like that).
This is why I'm generally against these kinds of solutions. It might be realistic for a squad's heavy weapons specialists to focus their fire on vehicles, aircraft, etc. But from a gameplay perspective it's just asking for trouble. I can imagine all sorts of situations where players are trying to look back and figure out whether they fired this or that heavy weapon in the squad, did the squad shoot yet, etc. And it would certainly slow down the game even more.
From an abstraction point of view, it's not hard to imagine the autocannon kicking up so much noise and dust that it prevents the rest of the squad from firing accurately, except at the target being hit by all the tracer rounds. So that's how I reason why my guardsmen's lasguns can't pick a different target.
|
"Bringer of death, speak your name, For you are my life, and the foe's death." - Litany of the Lasgun
2500 points
1500 points
1250 points
1000 points |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/05 13:31:42
Subject: "Weapons Free" rule for split fire.
|
 |
Ferocious Black Templar Castellan
|
Filch wrote:Do longfangs retain fire discipline? Back in 5th ed i for a space wolf player who used 3 squads of long fangs to have 2 lascannons and 2 plasma cannons in each squad. He would pop a transport with the 2 lascannon and then fire discipline to get the other 2 plasma cannons to drop blast templates onto the disembarked squad. That is how split fire should be used.
That'd be cheating though. He has to fire all the units shots at the same time, which means that the transport isn't broken by the time the plasma cannons fire.
|
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/06 15:38:39
Subject: "Weapons Free" rule for split fire.
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
Scoundrel13 wrote:This has probably been mooted in some form, but I'm struggling to think of a downside to this, so please poke holes and remind me why this hasn't been done!
Weapons Free
Any non-vehicle unit may split fire freely at a penalty of -1 BS for the entire unit.
Far more realistic, but might take longer to resolve I suppose. Good for short games.
My main complaint would be that it simply slows the game down too much. Maybe let the unit fire at a max of 2 different units? That way, you could melta the tank on your right while shooting up the gents on your left. I also like the idea of only making this possible while a sgt. equivalent is in the squad. It actually makes them feel leadery-y in a way that creates meaningful choices.
|
ATTENTION. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/12/05 12:32:51
Subject: "Weapons Free" rule for split fire.
|
 |
Newbie Black Templar Neophyte
Redditch, Worcestershire, UK
|
I think this would be a good rule and certainly worth proposing as a club house-rule perhaps?
|
JJ - WH40K: Imperial Fists - WHFB: Warriors of Chaos - BFG: Imperial Navy & Eldar
"After all, I don't play to win, I play to die in the name of the Emperor." Chris Peach
Gaming @ Redditch Tabletop Gamers - Redditch, Worcestershire, UK |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/12/08 14:29:38
Subject: "Weapons Free" rule for split fire.
|
 |
Courageous Space Marine Captain
|
What about simply making it so all weapons could fire at different targets but all of the same weapon had to target the same target. Ie, in a Platoon, you could have a Lasgun, Laspistol, Lascannon and Meltagun. The lasguns all have to target the same target, the laspistol can shoot something different, the lascannons can pick a different target, but all lascannons must have the same target. I feel that would be the most realistic, maybe a bit OP.
|
I'm celebrating 8 years on Dakka Dakka!
I started an Instagram! Follow me at Deadshot Miniatures!
DR:90+S++G+++M+B+IPw40k08#-D+++A+++/cwd363R+++T(Ot)DM+
Check out my Deathwatch story, Aftermath in the fiction section!
Credit to Castiel for banner. Thanks Cas!
|
|
 |
 |
|