Re: [NetEpic ML] [v5.0] AP vs AT

From: Lorenzo Canapicchi <lorenzo.canapicchi_at_...>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 15:54:27 +0200

darius spano wrote:
> Your answer to the AP/AT question is simply this: If
> it has no TSM modifier it is AP and if it does it is
> AT. You can stipulate a rule that armored vehicle
> units can only be affected by weapons with a -1 TSM or
> they gain a +1 to their Armor Save from weapons with a
> 0 TSM. We already do this with titans and void
> shields. As for barrages, some of them are powerful
> enough to damage vehicles and thus have both AP/AT
> ability.
>>

Yes, you're right this is also something very strange in Epic 40k
armageddon, who need AT/AP etc.? more things to track down more time spent
doing useless things, Armored unit? have a ST, those that haven't are
affected also by AT weapons, shooting with a lascannon to a guardsman must
be allowed but it's completely a waste of firepower.
So simple so good.

-- 
Lorenzo Canapicchi
TXT e-solutions S.p.A.
Via Frigia 27, 20126 Milano Italy
tel:  02.25771.460
http://www.txt.it
Received on Fri May 31 2002 - 13:54:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 10:59:43 UTC