rubber-police

Author Topic: Snap Firing over low obstacles  (Read 1322 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline grendeljd

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Mk III Assault Fiend
  • ****
  • Posts: 316
    • My Deviantart Gallery
Snap Firing over low obstacles
« on: March 23, 2012, 05:38:52 PM »
I was reading through the rules for Snap Firing.

In the Scenario Pack 1 book under Scenario Rules for Obstacles [p.32], it mentions you can snap fire from behind a low level obstacle. Normal Snap Firing entails using 2 movement points to step out from cover, shoot & step back with a -1 to hit or be shot at. Is it safe to assume that you can snap fire from a kneeling position behind an obstacle with no movement point cost but at the same -1 modifiers? Would you be considered walking?
I hate people generally, but I like them specifically - John Malkovich

Offline Clark

  • Overlord
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • *****
  • Posts: 491
Re: Snap Firing over low obstacles
« Reply #1 on: August 20, 2013, 11:19:21 AM »
2 MPs and you are considered walking unless you specifically want to run so you can move about after taking your snap fire.  If you choose to `remain stationary` you can do a pop-up from behind cover at no movement cost, and let èr rip. However, then you are vulnerable to counter-fire.

Offline grendeljd

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Mk III Assault Fiend
  • ****
  • Posts: 316
    • My Deviantart Gallery
Re: Snap Firing over low obstacles
« Reply #2 on: October 10, 2013, 10:45:30 AM »
Now thats interesting. No MP cost to pop-up from behind an obstacle is great - but I'm wondering now, if you are officially declaring the figure is remaining stationary do you also get the +1 to hit bonus, effectively counteracting the -1 to hit incurred from the snap-fire rule? I'm not looking to max out on bonus' for a cheap move, but perhaps a definition of this unique maneuver to cover it is required alongside the regular snap-fire rule.

Here are two possibilities then...


Snap-Fire from behind a low obstacle:

Option 1] A figure kneeling behind a low level obstacle can snap-fire over the obstacle with no movement point cost if choosing to remain stationary. The -1 to hit penalty from normal snap-firing around a corner is cancelled out by the +1 bonus for remaining stationary. The figure is also still subject to any available enemy fire, which still incurs a -1 to hit the snap-firing figure.

or,

Option 2] A figure kneeling behind a low level obstacle can snap-fire over the obstacle with no movement point cost if choosing to remain stationary. No bonus +1 to hit is given for this maneuver from remaining stationary, and the firing figure still incurs a -1 to hit. The figure is also still subject to any available enemy fire, which also incurs a -1 to hit the snap-firing figure.

Just a thought. It makes sense that the stationary bonus to hit wouldn't be allowed in this case as the figure is technically firing blind on a quick movement. But it would make for a rewarding maneuver [that wouldn't come up that often based on existing scenarios] if Option 1 was allowed...
I hate people generally, but I like them specifically - John Malkovich

Offline Clark

  • Overlord
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • *****
  • Posts: 491
Re: Snap Firing over low obstacles
« Reply #3 on: October 10, 2013, 07:26:13 PM »
My first response was just to keep snap firing consistent. Giving it some more thought, I have the following observations:

I believe that adopting a kneeling position costs MPs but rising from a kneeling position does not.  Assuming that a 0 MP action can be performed while "remaining stationary", you could stand up and fire over the low obstacle and receive the +1 modifier.  This isn't "snap firing". Similarly, you could declare yourself walking, stand up, fire, and then use your MPs to kneel down again without snapfiring.  In that case you do not get the -1 penalty on firing nor the defensive bonus. That's analagous to walking, spending 2MP to sidestep from behind full cover, fire, and then sidestep back behind the cover: no snapfiring and no modifiers.

A question is whether the defensive bonus for snapfiring (from behind a low obstacle) "stacks" with the defensive bonus for being behind the low obstacle itself? A Predator snapfiring from behind a low obstacle would be at -3 (!) to be hit while snapfiring. You would need half a dozen guys covering 0 at medium to have about a 50/50 chance of taking it out.

Offline bobloblah

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Mk III Assault Fiend
  • ****
  • Posts: 316
Re: Snap Firing over low obstacles
« Reply #4 on: October 18, 2013, 01:26:27 PM »
Shouldn't winkling out heavy opposition from an entrenched position be very hard? That's why God invented grenades, after all...
Best Regards,
Bobloblah

Offline Clark

  • Overlord
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • *****
  • Posts: 491
Re: Snap Firing over low obstacles
« Reply #5 on: October 18, 2013, 01:56:48 PM »
For sure, I am just thinking about the stacking effect. Should popping up over an obstacle give you twice as much cover as popping out from around one?  I don't just mean doubling the -1 but actually halving the chance to be hit.

Offline bobloblah

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Mk III Assault Fiend
  • ****
  • Posts: 316
Re: Snap Firing over low obstacles
« Reply #6 on: October 18, 2013, 02:56:59 PM »
Here's a dangerous question: what's the real-world efficacy of such a tactic?
Best Regards,
Bobloblah

Offline Clark

  • Overlord
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • *****
  • Posts: 491
Re: Snap Firing over low obstacles
« Reply #7 on: October 19, 2013, 02:21:58 AM »
Ha ha, probably somewhere between -0 and -1 which is why it presents a problem. 

Short of asking military or police trainers (which is actually a possibility) if you know any paintball or airsoft enthusiasts they might be able to give some insight.

If you know someone is hiding and know where they will pop out, it is extremely easy to pick them off. 

More generally, you don't have to expose as much of yourself to fire over something as you do firing around something.  Similarly, for someone right handed, you expose less to lean out to the right of a verticle obstacle (from your perspective, the opposite from the POV of your target) than you do to lean out to the left.  Again, a -1 modifier cuts the attacker's chance in half so do any of these differences justify that big a difference in kill chances?