A tactic I had never considered...

[horizon]

Sigoroth found the idea of creating blastmarkers through shooting one he would allow in the end. Just like me.
The rules say it can't be, yet the idea is good and would be allowed.

So what's the problem in this case? None. 

///as for using Ld instead of gunnery dice I disagree. You are still trying to achieve something with shooting a smoke curtain. So you want to hit the correct spot, just like a smoke grenade in 40k,


- warning
lol, Sig replied.

Agreed on bm placement.

Perhaps limiting the screen to 15 or 30cm max?

As for racial modifiers: Nah, it gets to fiddled for a niche rule. Orks throw enough scrap into the void to make up for Eldar's accuracy.

[Talos]

Haha I do not mean to imply you are set in your ways, Sig. I have great respect for your design skill and solid logic. As for the leadership/ordinance you and horizon bring forth valid points about blast marker quantity. My max range comment was not based on a game play element but a rather weak (on hindsight ) attempt to enforce some minor realism, while ignoring other realistic aspects (face palm). Forgot AI/AO rule. I personally think that resolving it like ordinance hits makes it to unlikely to create any effective cover, but I suppose that depends on how impactful you consider a blast marker to be.

[AndrewChristlieb]

Placed correctly a single bm can make a real difference. I would agree that it should be past 15cm you wouldnt want the blasts too close to the ship after all and that limits people targeting within 15 just to get a couple extra dice. Overall though when your talking a mechanic like this which would take place in the early game more than later theres a good chance that any markers you manage to place will have to be removed during the end phase.

[Talos]

My point exactly! With so little dice and only a one in six chance of hitting, your looking at roughly 1 blast marker per 36 firepower, which is not exactly phenomenal. Matter of fact, from the lists I have seen, not many fleets can muster 36 battery to one side in a single squadron...heck, some 1500pt lists don't even have that much battery in a broadside across the whole fleet! Along with the fact that you remove 1d6 a round, the odds of blast markers sticking around to protect you with the models that the good folks of this forum are suggesting is...astronomically unlikely, at least in the first turns were it matters. Having to roll sixes is not a big issue, but having it count as ordnance allows almost no chance of effective use.

Perhaps if you could count it as something other than actual ordinance, as it is a lot easier to create a blanket cloud than hit a target. Although I don't have a number, I remember reading 1cm=10,000km somewheres. Assuming even 1cm=1000km (ludicrous), a ship is only a couple of km long, whereas a blast marker (3cm, I believe) is thus 3000km, or more likely 30,000km. Hitting a 20 meter fighter and a 30,000km should not be equally difficult, no? Just my two cents.

[horizon]

BFG: 1cm = 1000km.

I think it should be : ordnance column for number of dice. 4+ to succeed in create the bm.

[Talos]

So were going to go with ordnance column, 4+to create...that actually sounds pretty good. What about range modifiers? Or range minimums like me and Andrew suggested? To be honest, I actually prefer his...

[Zhukov]

Here is where I'll put in some of my 2 cents.

With this idea, what exactly are we talking about? We are suggesting a ship fire it's WB's as timed rounds to create a screen between two vessels. Well, that is incredibly hard to do. Besides getting the placement and distance right, you have to hope the rounds fired into enough of a density to create a screen thick enough to interfere with a targeting computer. Hence why I think firing at Ordnance (specific location) and requiring 6's to hit (creating a screen thick enough to interfere) is the best way to represent this. I also believe that shooting within 15cm and receiving that column shift is extraordinarily important in seeing this tactic work (with of course the off chance those blast markers end up interfering with your own movement and firing later in the game). Of course, the firing player must designate his target first, and yes, one blast marker for each 'hit' rolled should be placed.

Certainly not an idea that a lot of people will use, but I can see it coming in handy from time to time.

-Zhukov

[Talos]

@Zhukov The problem with your interpretation isn't that it wouldn't work, or that it wouldn't make sense; youa re correct in both. It's that without it conferring a reasonable benefit and a reasonable chance of working, it is almost never worth using, which makes a fringe rule. As sigoroth mentioned, a fringe rule that is only of minor use every few games is hardly worth writing specifics about. That said you can always just use your own rules if you think their better; if the games you play are large enough (2500pt+) even with your rules you might see some effective use due to larger quantity of standing blast markers.

[Silent Requiem]

What about the following method?

In the shooting phase, any number of weapon batteries in a squadron can be combined to create a single blast marker, just as they could be combined to fire at any other target. A leadership test is then rolled, where the ld to be passed is twice the number of batteries allocated to the blast marker. A successful test allows the player to place one blast marker anywhere within the arc or range of all the weapon batteries, providing it is not touching another ship.

This method would properly distinguish between the ability of a Cobra to throw up a wall of fire, and a Lunar, for example.

[Talos]

@Silent Requiem Hah! Someone who finally understands that the concept of coordination has nothing to do with gunner skill! I thought I was going to languish alone...

Hmmm...if I understand you correctly, then a lunar battery would have to roll under 12 and a cobra under 2? Seems like we should just use unmodified battery strength; makes it a bit harder to do (impossible for just 1 firepower ) but encourages multiple ships to do it together. I will throw this idea out to my regular gaming partner.

[ThaneAquilon]

From your regular gaming partner: I am disinclined to adopt this rule, but I am willing to try it out. It does seem like a rather one sided benefit, though. None of my fleets muster much battery strength, while all of yours do. (Beofer you shoot back that we play some of the same fleets, I am also considering composition;p)

[Talos]

@ThaneAquilon Actually your Eldar fleet has more battery than any composition I have used, along with better leadership to go with this rule. Not to mention you benefit from being screened more than I do since you have shorter range...combined with maneuverability and prow facing armaments, you fleets can also position the shots in more useful places. So although the rule is very much one sided in benefiting you only, I am curious to try it out. It is not a tactic I would use; I am merely curious to see if the battery=leadership test is viable or too easy/too hard. RAW, it seems solid though.

How would we integrate existing ship leadership into this? As is its as easy for orks as for SM, despite the LD difference.

[ThaneAquilon]

I use like three aconites for my battery now that I've painted up my lighter escorts, and you're running 2 carnages, or 2 dominators and emperors and such...and coincidentally, IN are not know to have longer range than Tau or Eldar or Chaos. I'll give that having prow weapons would be useful with this tactic.

I also would not use this tactic, generally (Hence my disinclination to have it).

[Talos]

@ThaneAquilon Have yet to run chaos...who, admitedly, would gain stand to gain the most, aside from orks of course and potentially nids. Also, I averaged out at around 30ish directed battery in our 750pts games (all we have actually played so far) whereas you ran in actuality 2 squadrons of 4 aconite and a hellebore...44 directed battery.

Its not a common tactic, and one that (like everyone else on this thread) they would use only seldom if at all. The point of this is more "how viable is this?" and "how would we implement this?". For myself, I am mostly trying to brainstorm a simple but effective way to do this. I am still in favor of a leadership test, with -1 for long range and +1 for short, +1 per battery involved. The disparity between smaller ships and bigger ships can be explained by better coordination/firing arcs.

[Valhallan]

Hey guys! long time no see.

I agree that Ld tests are too easy, especially Ld scaled by # of batteries. chaos could clog a flank like Tau do with missiles.

I am much more of a fan of actually rolling to shoot. but it shouldn't be too easy to pull off, imagine two zig-zagging IN squads covering each other's prow's...

so my - initial - thoughts are 1.) only captial ships can do it. and 2) roll as per hitting ord. if you get a 6 place a BM for each WB slot on your ship (2 for a dominator/tyrant, 1 for lunar, 3 for a ret). and of course these Bm's have to be touching and in a straight line

thoughts?