Double Covering Fire

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

Alan Charlesworth
Posts: 127
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 7:13 am

Double Covering Fire

Post by Alan Charlesworth »

If a unit is subject to the heavier weight of suppression caused by two seperate units subjecting it to Covering Fire. Should it fire with a -2 modifier?

EvilGinger
Posts: 990
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 3:01 am

Re: Double Covering Fire

Post by EvilGinger »

I tend to think that once you have got to an adiquate level to achive covering fire you are not going to get a better result by adding more to that one fire.

:evil: Ginger
Dark lord at large....

User avatar
Jeremy
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 5:45 am

Re: Double Covering Fire

Post by Jeremy »

EvilGinger wrote:I tend to think that once you have got to an adiquate level to achive covering fire you are not going to get a better result by adding more to that one fire.

:evil: Ginger

Tend to agree with this

evillsvain
Posts: 153
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 5:12 am

Re: Double Covering Fire

Post by evillsvain »

Still, you could argue that if, say, 3 teams are pouring fire into a window (so giving -3 for the enemy to shoot back) it would reflect pretty accurately the fact that no sane trooper in that situation would peep out from the window. Change of position might be a better idea.

Cheers,

Ville

Wulf
Posts: 269
Joined: Sat Sep 07, 2013 9:23 am

Re: Double Covering Fire

Post by Wulf »

You could also say that two teams providing crossfire would have more effect than a single team from a single direction.

User avatar
Jeremy
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 5:45 am

Re: Double Covering Fire

Post by Jeremy »

Would a leader, regardless of level, waste the resources of so many teams?

evillsvain
Posts: 153
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 5:12 am

Re: Double Covering Fire

Post by evillsvain »

Jeremy wrote:Would a leader, regardless of level, waste the resources of so many teams?
That depends - if there would be a MG in a position or a Panzerschrek team trying to ambush a nearby tank then yes. And sometimes soldiers just blaze away even though trained not to. But you're right in that it would be hard to present it so that it wouldn't be abused. One should probably then have ammunition expenditure tracking system etc. and the games would start to bog down.
I'm really not in the favor for Covering Fire to give -1 or multiple minuses, just thinking out "loud".

Cheers,

Ville

Nick B
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 7:46 am

Re: Double Covering Fire

Post by Nick B »

I agree it should be one -1 only. Otherwise you start getting into a Junior NCO activating 2 teams from the same section separately for his 2 activations,giving -2 where as those Nationalities, such as the Russians, would only be able to active the section as a whole, even though the fire put down is roughly equal.

That then leads potentially to long discussions about "how much fire power = one -1 etc" and for me that is getting too granular.

Cheers

Nick

hedgehobbit
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 3:49 pm

Re: Double Covering Fire

Post by hedgehobbit »

Multiple Covering Fire is not overpowered. The teams providing the covering fire do not actually do any damage. Consider how much actual shock/kills those three teams could have placed. Your opponent simply doesn't activate the team being covered and can use those activations somewhere else, so he doesn't really lose anything except the opportunity for fire a unit whereas you lost the opportunity to fire multiple teams.

There might be a situation where it makes sense but I don't see it being an effective game-winning or game-breaking tactic.

User avatar
Truscott Trotter
Posts: 7662
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:11 pm
Location: Tasmania the Southernmost CoC in the world

Re: Double Covering Fire

Post by Truscott Trotter »

Dunno about two rifle teams making that much difference in covering fire but a belt fed MG with ROF 800-1200 rpm made a hell of a difference in Real Life (TM)

Post Reply