|
RE: 4TH EDITION TABLE RELEASED.
Well, if this rule change was an attempt to add more realism to the game system I can understand a few arguments both pro and con. Opportunity fire is against moving targets. The (-1) AT modifier is understandable enough as most AT capable units can only lob so many armor-piercing shells at a moving target within a 15 minute turn and each shell would have to make direct contact to be effective -fine. In the case of having or not having a (+1) DF opportunity fire bonus against all moving targets it is understood that motorized and mechanized units will most likely be moving much faster than foot units but, especially in the case of an HMG unit many rounds can be sprayed down in anticipation of the mobile, moving target's next hex entered within a 15 minute turn. Armor immunity is sufficient enough against DF attacks whether through opportunity fire or otherwise. Moving targets are what they are whether armored or not. So I believe that the (+1) DF opportunity fire bonus should be against either all targets or none of them at all. If this was an attempt at realism then PG is probably not the right system. If that were the case than rules that allow foot units to overrun armor units and easily eliminate them, rather than merely disable them AND not have to make serious morale checks beforehand AND also assuming they have things like teller mines, molotov cocktails or hand grenades to lob down a turret (open or closed) would have to swept aside. There are optional rules, apparently a whole booklet of them alone in the new 4th edition set to try to add realism -fine. Let players whether solo or in shared matches decide or negotiate that.
|
