BEvo: Emplacements and an unknown table column.

[Cpl Futz]

OK, doesn't appear to have any game effect, but I wondered what the original intent of the "Ignored Armor Rolls" column on the emplacements' table on p.34 of the Modern combat rules was about? It is not referenced anywhere else in the rules.

Cheers,

Paul

 

[Iain McGhee]

Hmm, hadn't noticed this before. It's just a typo, it should be Hits rather than Ignored Armour Rolls. The same table in the WAW book is correct.

It's a holdover from the old Battlefield:Evolution rules which didn't have hits for large models but had them ignore the first X failed armour rolls.

 

[Cpl Futz]

Hi Iain,

Thanks for getting back again. I take it then that the "Ignored armour..." column is effectively "extra" hits that can be taken by a fortified structure (emplacement), before we start eating into its normal, size related hits.

For example a Small Bunker (size 6) as listed on the table would have 1.5x4=6 size related hits, but could take up to 6 initial hits (representing fortification) before its 6 size related hits would start to be blown away.

I'm confirming as the MC rules carry no such info at all of course.

Cheers,

Paul

 

[Iain McGhee]

The "Ignored Armour Saves" column gives the TOTAL hits for emplacements. They don't use the formula given for ordinary buildings since they are of stronger construction (even if they have a bunker picture with the structure damage examples just to confuse players ).
Your small bunker would have 9 hits, as per the table.

Note that emplacements also have armour saves, unlike normal structures.

 

[Cpl Futz]

Hi Iain,

Thanks for that - hadn't really registered the armour save.

The small bunker only actually has 6 hits (standard for its size number), but add in an easy armor save and the target and kill numbers of a bunker in most cases and emplacements are as tough as hell. So, with the revised column definition, it all makes sense.

Thanks,

Paul