BFG FAQ 2010 General Rules Questions

[RCgothic]

The very fact it needs explaining is why it should be dumped in favour of the older rules.

[Mazila]

It needs explaining because Sig is obviously trolling me - everyone got what i mean ages ago.

[Sigoroth]

Sig it has no affect, since it just does not work the way you say. I was using it so that i am clear on the mechanic.

Better example: Say - you have 2 ships:

Half of the base of ship 1 is in the dust cloud. Ship 1 is in btb with ship 1. The dust cloud has no effect on ship 2 but has is on ship 1.

Same thing here Ship with bm is treated as  "a dust cloud" for purpose of understanding which ships it affects.

Alright, I don't think we're speaking the same language here because I have no idea what you mean.

[Mazila]

Call me on skype then

[horizon]

By all means Mazila, your English skills are less then Sigoroth's English skills (mine are lesser as well) so it is more your fault to clarify your point of view since I don't get it as well.

[silashand]

Firmly on the side of the people wanting this rule changed back to v1.0

It's illogical and confusing the way it is.

Not sure if I replied here already, but add my name to this list as well.

Cheers, Gary

[horizon]

Quite remarkable how the online veterans want this rule back. That's what you get for not getting in touch with the community when you make such changes.

So a thumbs up for the HA to gather a lot of feedback this time around. Even if we are harsh, critical and sometimes even happy. heh heh.

Quite happy.

[fracas]

i am fine with the ruling that blast marker affects the entire base rather than in line of fire

[Vaaish]

I prefer the 1.0 method. Makes for a more interesting game but we play it as ruled.

[lastspartacus]

The new way at least makes you think before shooting and launching ordnance at the same target. 
Going back to 1.0 certainly makes WBs much stronger.

[fracas]

If stacked blast markers mean something then v1 ruling might be interesting but as it stand the base represent an area where the ship is vulnerable and blast markers represent area affect the newer ruling works for me

[Don Gusto]

I like the current rules for blast markers and think they are a big improvement to gameplay.

Also since shields in BFG aren't directional it doesn't make much sense to have a directional effect from blast markers.
Using this disparity to your advantage feels more like a rules exploit than good tactics.

[Sigoroth]

I like the current rules for blast markers and think they are a big improvement to gameplay.

Also since shields in BFG aren't directional it doesn't make much sense to have a directional effect from blast markers.
Using this disparity to your advantage feels more like a rules exploit than good tactics.

Blast markers are produced from the interaction between your shields and the incoming fire. Any particular reason why this interference should reach around to the other side of the ship? The shields might be omni-directional by the incoming fire isn't.

[Mazila]

From the top of my head: explosions and radiation from high energy weapons and warheads causes interfearence with targeting matrix and makes it harder to target the ship from any side - remember that we are talking about thousands of km between targets...

[Sigoroth]

From the top of my head: explosions and radiation from high energy weapons and warheads causes interfearence with targeting matrix and makes it harder to target the ship from any side - remember that we are talking about thousands of km between targets...

Oh really, but if the explosion occurs just a few kms away then all that radiation doesn't radiate anymore. Also, one would expect that the hull of the ship would block the radiation, casting a shadow that ships on the other side of the interference could see. The whole point of a BM is to represent that that very particular piece of space is hard to get a read in. So if you try to target something on the other side of it then it will cause interference. If the ship is between you and the interference then there is no problem.