I think we can all agree that Z fire is indeed useful for doing "recon by fire" or firing on suspected enemy locations before it's fully identified. Which begs the question: is it really necessary for the Z fire to be able to go past obstacles? Recon by fire usually happens when you have direct LOS to those "suspected locations." I can accept if it's just an obstruction of LOS, like smoke. But going past building blocks and forests?
In a
utopian world, in which one can snap a finger and everything happens, here's my suggestion:
(1). Z fire can only happen when the unit has direct LOS to the target hex, which means it's very similar to directed/targeted fire. This way, a unit that does Z firing is not immune from being Op-fired by enemy units. Exception to this rule would be when there's a smokescreen, or technically, non-terrain obstruction of LOS. I'm pretty confident everyone on both sides can agree on this.
(2). Z fire consumes A LOT of Movement Point, thus reducing shot count & movement ability, as Andy previously suggested. Although some would not agree to this.
But then again, Andy is spot on in saying that Z fire is human-only feature... well, what can I say about it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by gila
Almost always z-fire from from small arms fire results in suppression sometimes maybe retreat if pressed enough very rarely a causality thats b/c guys will lay low.
With aty no matter if your flat on the ground if a round hits close you may or not have causality or two.
|
Yes that is true, most of the time if the volume of fire is high enough, Retreat status is very common. Which is worse than suffering casualty: with one or two wounded/killed soldiers, a unit may still retain its effectiveness as a whole, but when a unit is flagged as "Retreating", it is practically useless as a whole unit. Now, some may say, "Retreating" is not permanent while casualty is permanent; I'd say, due to the nature of Z fire being ubiquitous and instantaneous, that "Retreat" status may as well become a permanent status.