PDA

View Full Version : Crossfire



BajsArne
21-08-2007, 17:55
I am by no means a master of squad level tactics (nor any tactics for that matter) but one concept which I think is missing from 40k is crossfire. There is no real advantage in shooting someone from several sides at once, unless they are behind a non-area kid of terrain and you manage to get around that. So I was thinking of trying out some kind of crossfire rule to see what happens. I was thinking if it is possible to draw a straight line between two squads shooting at one squad with the target in between, bad stuff happens to the target. I canít decide what exactly though. Some ideas are:

-Pinning check (penalty for ordinary pinning check if weapon is already pinning)
-Morale test (automatic break if morale check is called for?)
-Penalty to cover save

Is this a really stupid idea that would make mobile armies even more powerful?

Democratus
21-08-2007, 18:04
It's a good idea. But it belongs in a game that is more dedicated to realism in combat, like Squad Leader or Memoir 44.

Davachido
21-08-2007, 18:05
This may have gone better in rules development, but this isn't a bad idea.

Though following your idea from rules we have already, you must pass a LD test to shoot something behind another squad, so the squad should take a pinning test I would think. Reason being is they will be ducking to cover from the incoming bullets. Though it would be pretty powerful to be able to pin something like that so probably change the shooting the target behind at LD with a -1 or -2 modifier.

Nurglitch
21-08-2007, 18:06
Warhammer 40k has organic crossfire. If you look at the shooting rules you'll notice that casualties can only be removed from a unit if those models removed as casualties were in line of sight and range to the shooting unit.

This means that you can crossfire a unit by positioning shooting units so that their firepower is directed at different parts of a unit they share as a target.

Similarly the casualty removal rules in assaults mean that you can also out-flank a unit by moving so that an assault move only forces you to engage select models in the assaulted unit.

Chaos and Evil
21-08-2007, 18:31
In Epic, putting enemies in a crossfire does the following:

- Reduces the enemy's armour save by one.
- Applies an extra Blast Marker on the enemy (A morale effect).


Units with 'Thick rear Armour' like Land Raiders ignore the extra effects.

Might be a good place to start?

BajsArne
21-08-2007, 19:41
Do you think memoir44 is dedicated to realism? I find talk of realism to be pretty strange usually, when something claims to be realistic it usually is just more complex, but it is still an abstraction.

Reducing armour saves might actually be a pretty good idea because it would stop marines and anything that bashes marines is a good thing.

SwordJon
21-08-2007, 20:08
I love the idea for rules like these, but I think they would be more applicable in a smaller scale game. Like, approximately 500-750(ish) points of troops as they now stand, so the game wouldn't take 5 hours, but with extra rules to represent small tactical skirmishes.

Chaos and Evil
22-08-2007, 00:05
*shrug*

The rule I posted is from Epic, which represents much bigger battles... I don't see why it couldn't be ported to the smaller scale of W40k.

SwordJon
22-08-2007, 01:28
I'm sure it could be. But at 40K scale with say, 1500-2000 points, games start taking exponentially longer to play for every rule you add. And with something like crossfire, it wouldn't be a single rule change, I would think. But I'd guess I'd have to see it in person to actually tell one way or another.

505
22-08-2007, 01:53
unfortunitly real life tactics don't work quite as well on the tabeltop.

oh well

I agree multiple directions of fire should have some sort of penalty

zeep
22-08-2007, 02:58
Ironically when you get right down to it, 40k plays more like a naval engagement (concentration of fire, etc) then Squad level tactics. I would love to see somebody actually execute Battle Drills and have it work in the game.