I see no reason what so ever to differensiate AP vs AT. I have always percieved it that they have two modes of shooting. AT ammo vs tanks and such, HE ammo vs personell. This is abstracted in netepic, as it should be, that the weapons are equall effective vs both type of targets.
Keep It Simple (Stupid) is my slogan... :-)
Eivind
>
> Fra: "Weasel Fierce" <weasel_fierce_at_...>
> Dato: 2002/05/31 Fri PM 04:01:56 CEST
> Til: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> Emne: Re: [NetEpic ML] [v5.0] AP vs AT
>
> >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.
>
> Actually, one of the things Im unhappy about in NetEpic is how AT fire will
> kill infantry as well as small arms.
>
> A lascannon fires a single, concentrated pulse of energy at a time. Killing
> off a dispersed fireteam ought to be very hard, compared to a machinegun or
> a group with rifles and grenades
>
>
>
>
> Weasel
>
>
> How many lives will be taken today?
> How many times will we just look away?
>
> Pennywise - One voice
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>
>
>
> 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 Fri May 31 2002 - 14:39:24 UTC