Fire for Effect

Rules questions, suggestions, and discussion

Moderators: IVhorseman, Pwnerade

Fire for Effect

Postby Jabberwocky » Fri Aug 19, 2016 1:26 am

For those of you that are unfamiliar with military lingo.... fire for effect is similar to repeat (never say repeat over a radio... it means repeat fire mission). It signals the artillery battery that they have made a sucessful hit and can unleash multiple rounds to do an area of effect sweep to kill surviving hostiles and nearby targets. In my mind... this is in essence automatic fire for indirect fire systems. Id like to purpose that provided a direct hit on target by an artillery battery (6 squads or 6 artillery pieces ) that multiple firings be permitted so long as a scout/forward observer watches the round impact the target. After those requirements are met treat the barrage as automatic fire until dice roll failure ammunition runs dry or target is destroyed. It can also be noted that friendly fire could be the crit fail
TROLOLO
Jabberwocky
Champion
Champion
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:10 am

Re: Fire for Effect

Postby AnnoyedZebra » Fri Aug 19, 2016 7:43 am

This could work. Its just a bit specialised for standard rules. Write this in bonus material and I'm sure people could get some use out of it.
Image Image
User avatar
AnnoyedZebra
Somebody make this Zebra's rank.
 
Posts: 891
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 8:46 am

Re: Fire for Effect

Postby bann154 » Fri Aug 19, 2016 11:35 am

Just saying any launcher can fire its size worth of explosives so to do what you are saying simple buy a large laucnher (Size 6 or so) and load it to the brim with size 1 explosives and continue to fire 6 size 1 explosives.
My Factions/My Battles/My Painting and Modelling Adventures
A mind without purpose will wander in dark places
User avatar
bann154
bann is the mann
 
Posts: 895
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 11:06 am
Location: Canada Eh?

Re: Fire for Effect

Postby stubby » Fri Aug 19, 2016 1:09 pm

AnnoyedZebra wrote:This could work. Its just a bit specialised for standard rules. Write this in bonus material and I'm sure people could get some use out of it.

One of the bonus supplements I've always wanted is a whole set of rules just for artillery and field artillery teams and off-map bombardment. There's no possible way to justify the extra complexity, so I'll never do it, but it's still stupidly appealing to me for no reason I can explain.
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?
User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
 
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: Fire for Effect

Postby Dienekes22 » Fri Aug 19, 2016 2:48 pm

I was under the impression that with Gunners and such that all this was in the rules already.
stubby wrote:Oh man, look at these guys. Beautiful units, photos in focus, appropriately cropped, white background... what if I remove all the current photos from the rulebook and just replace everything with these

Image
Medivo factions - Medivo Forum Battles
Sci-Fi Factions -
User avatar
Dienekes22
Minifig
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:40 pm
Location: Des Moines, IA

Re: Fire for Effect

Postby Jabberwocky » Fri Aug 19, 2016 8:20 pm

bann154 wrote:Just saying any launcher can fire its size worth of explosives so to do what you are saying simple buy a large laucnher (Size 6 or so) and load it to the brim with size 1 explosives and continue to fire 6 size 1 explosives.


This does sort of work..... unless you are doing man portable items such as mortars to keep the artillery in play. Means a size 2 or 3 tube while highly mobile cannot compete with fire compared to a large near immobile piece. Thats why i suggested an alternate ''rapid fire'' for artillery. Another option i thought of is perhaps a forward operating base where you evacuate casualties to. Launch air missions from. Artillery strikes from.... where the main battle cannot reach it and maybe an airstrike etc can derail support structures. But that only works large scale
TROLOLO
Jabberwocky
Champion
Champion
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:10 am

Re: Fire for Effect

Postby Gungnir » Sat Aug 20, 2016 4:54 am

I've always felt that indirect fire was overpowered. Not to mention cowardly.
You should look a fig in the eye when you put him down.
BrikThulhu eats 1d6 minifigs each turn.
User avatar
Gungnir
Jaw-Jaw
 
Posts: 994
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 3:01 am

Re: Fire for Effect

Postby Jabberwocky » Sat Aug 20, 2016 6:58 am

Gungnir wrote:I've always felt that indirect fire was overpowered. Not to mention cowardly.
You should look a fig in the eye when you put him down.


Next youll tell me sniping is a cowardly act.... i don't want to hear it michael bay lol. Artillery is viable for historic anti vehicle rolls. And was the dominating force during the great war. Tell them soldiers from ww1 that they were cowards and did not fight like gentlemen.

Artillery could be overpowered.... but the larger more powerful guns are naturally more of a bitch to use. Needing to be mounted on tanks and such. Even small yet viable artillery will need to be trailered to move or mounted to a c130 or something
TROLOLO
Jabberwocky
Champion
Champion
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:10 am

Re: Fire for Effect

Postby Dienekes22 » Sat Aug 20, 2016 9:13 am

Next youll tell me sniping is a cowardly act.... i don't want to hear it michael bay lol. Artillery is viable for historic anti vehicle rolls. And was the dominating force during the great war. Tell them soldiers from ww1 that they were cowards and did not fight like gentlemen.

Artillery could be overpowered.... but the larger more powerful guns are naturally more of a bitch to use. Needing to be mounted on tanks and such. Even small yet viable artillery will need to be trailered to move or mounted to a c130 or something


I think he meant in the game.
stubby wrote:Oh man, look at these guys. Beautiful units, photos in focus, appropriately cropped, white background... what if I remove all the current photos from the rulebook and just replace everything with these

Image
Medivo factions - Medivo Forum Battles
Sci-Fi Factions -
User avatar
Dienekes22
Minifig
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:40 pm
Location: Des Moines, IA

Re: Fire for Effect

Postby AnnoyedZebra » Sat Aug 20, 2016 9:17 am

This is a game about slaughtering as many people as possible. If you're going to kill huge amounts of people why not let them kill huge amounts of people?
Image Image
User avatar
AnnoyedZebra
Somebody make this Zebra's rank.
 
Posts: 891
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 8:46 am

Re: Fire for Effect

Postby Gungnir » Sat Aug 20, 2016 8:45 pm

Jabberwocky wrote:
Gungnir wrote:I've always felt that indirect fire was overpowered. Not to mention cowardly.
You should look a fig in the eye when you put him down.


Next youll tell me sniping is a cowardly act.... i don't want to hear it michael bay lol. Artillery is viable for historic anti vehicle rolls. And was the dominating force during the great war. Tell them soldiers from ww1 that they were cowards and did not fight like gentlemen.

Artillery could be overpowered.... but the larger more powerful guns are naturally more of a bitch to use. Needing to be mounted on tanks and such. Even small yet viable artillery will need to be trailered to move or mounted to a c130 or something

This isn't The Great War.  :sparta:
Imitating Michael Bay is 100% in the spirit of the game.
BrikThulhu eats 1d6 minifigs each turn.
User avatar
Gungnir
Jaw-Jaw
 
Posts: 994
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 3:01 am

Re: Fire for Effect

Postby Jabberwocky » Sat Aug 20, 2016 10:45 pm

Copying Michael bays movies are in the spirit of brikwars... His backwards thoughts on war and personal freedoms n firearms on the otherhand... #derailedtopic.... So far figuring out artillery seems to be generally thought of as a good idea
TROLOLO
Jabberwocky
Champion
Champion
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2015 1:10 am

Re: Fire for Effect

Postby bann154 » Sat Aug 20, 2016 11:13 pm

Artillery and airstrikes? Sniping? Please
Image
My Factions/My Battles/My Painting and Modelling Adventures
A mind without purpose will wander in dark places
User avatar
bann154
bann is the mann
 
Posts: 895
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 11:06 am
Location: Canada Eh?

Re: Fire for Effect

Postby Gungnir » Sun Aug 21, 2016 5:37 am

Is the shark driving?
Spoiler: show
Image
BrikThulhu eats 1d6 minifigs each turn.
User avatar
Gungnir
Jaw-Jaw
 
Posts: 994
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 3:01 am

Re: Fire for Effect

Postby stubby » Sun Aug 21, 2016 3:43 pm

Gungnir wrote:I've always felt that indirect fire was overpowered. Not to mention cowardly.
You should look a fig in the eye when you put him down.

The trick to indirect fire in brikwars is making sure there's always that fig you can look in the eye. That's why I put the Scouts in there. You can't take out an off-map airbase or artillery battery, but you can take out their eyes on the field, and then they start missing their shots so badly that they're more of an asset to their enemy than to themselves.
Natalya wrote:Wtf is going on in this thread?
User avatar
stubby
tl;dr: the rule of fudge is the entire rulebook
 
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Next

Return to The Rulebook

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron