Hi,
As a bit of an outside "Observer", I think you have some good ideas here. I
would worry slightly about it becoming too much like the current 40K though,
and I'm guessing this is where the main influence has been.
The rules are bieng split into Basic and advanced are they not? So why not
keep the basic rules for organisation as they are, and introduce more
detailed command structures in the advanced version. Thats the way my
current 15mm Game system works.
Basic game: Orders are simply placed with counters.
Advanced game (there are stages in between here btw..): Orders get sent out
from the general, through messengers to the units. Some don't get through,
get mis-read etc (ie fog of war).
It was probably being done anyway knowing my comment value on this list ;)
Cheers,
Paul "TuffSkull" T.
http://epic40k.com - If its Epic, Its there! (Now an Official Warpgate
Network site!)
http://welcome.to/weird_world - Weird World Wargaming.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christian Danckworth" <ce.de_at_...>
To: "Peter Ramos" <netepic_at_yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 12:42 PM
Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] Brainstorm session
> Hello Peter,
>
> Tuesday, March 26, 2002, 1:22:16 PM, you wrote:
>
> PR> Hi!
>
> PR> I thought I would throw out some ideas and comments that would be
reviewed come revision time in order to get a feel for opinions:
>
>
> PR> 1. While I could go either way on the holofield for Eldar super
heavies, it did bring up a more important issue regarding the super heavy
damage tables. Do people like the very simple one or are
> PR> you using the more detailed ones? Whats the preference?
>
> we mainly use the more detailed ones to keep up athmosphere
>
> PR> 2. Praetorian costs are too low. This has been discussed before and
after much playtest I agree that they need to be increased. The fact that
they have templates make them as powerful as titans
> PR> and sould be priced accordingly. For example, look at the Colossus,
with its 8 battle cannon hitting on 4+ and shields. This thing is as good as
most warlord titans! I tinkered with the points
> PR> formula and would suggest that most praetorians need a price hike of
150 points on average. Comments?
>
> thats my opinion as well...but not too much
>
> PR> 3. Another thorn is the issue of weapons with the same name having
different stats for different units (bolters being the most prominent
example). A lascannon should have the same stats
> PR> regardless where its on as well as battle cannons, etc. Some
uniformity here makes it easier for people to remember
>
> yep
>
> PR> 4. AA guns should probably be defined as one of two types :static and
mobile. Static AA are expensive, have long range and may only fire at either
air or ground in a turn (not both). Mobile AA
> PR> are cheap, shorter range and can fire at both ground and air units
indescriminately.
>
> sounds good to me.
> one comment to the range debate in generell - i like games where i
> have to make myself a plan to avoid beeing shot by aa (with my fliers)
> - it prevents the player to use too many of them becoming to strong. i
> always try to concentrate against aa (by bike-attcks, etc.) to make the
> air "free" for my flyer attacks or thunderhawk landing
> PR> These are but some, more will come to me in time and I'll post them.
>
> PR> Peter
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Christian mailto:ce.de_at_...
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
Received on Tue Mar 26 2002 - 12:59:53 UTC