I made alternate artillery rules that did this. The general consensus was it
was too complex :) I could forward that article to you if you want.
Ken
"If some unemployed punk in New Jersey can get a casette to make love to
Elle McPherson for $19.95, this virtual reality stuff is going to make crack
look like Sanka."
-Dennis Miller
----- Original Message -----
From: Andy Michaud <amichaud_at_...>
To: <netepic_at_egroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 1999 2:40 AM
Subject: [NetEpic ML] Re: [NetEpic] Eldar
>
>
> Wilding K wrote:
>
> > Just a quick point - can we introduce something to account for vehicles
> > moving while a barrage in is flight? Perhaps have the barrage announced
> > at the END of the turn, and landing at the beginning of the following
> > turn? The player would write down where the barrage will land (+/-
> > scatter) and then the 'victim' gets to move. Might make them less likely
> > to go for the old 'first fire' approach.
> >
> > Alternatively, perhaps reduce the barrage strength by one 'level' on
> > advance orders, or 2 levels for charge to indicate the target is going
> > to be a ground zero for a shorter amount of time.
> >
> > Maybe the flight-time of projectiles can be accounted for? Up to half
> > max range and they land in the same turn a la normal rules, over this
> > and they use one of the sugestions above?
> >
>
> Using the above rules Artillery would be pretty much useless. I usually
> play against squat and this would be crippling to any army with artillery
> in it.
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> GRAB THE GATOR! FREE SOFTWARE DOES ALL THE TYPING FOR YOU!
> Gator fills in forms and remembers passwords with NO TYPING at over
> 100,000 web sites! Get $100 in coupons for trying Gator!
> http://clickhere.egroups.com/click/2092
>
> -- Create a poll/survey for your group!
> -- http://www.egroups.com/vote?listname=netepic&m=1
>
>
>
Received on Thu Dec 09 1999 - 18:47:27 UTC