RE: RE: [NetEpic ML] Digest Number 1216

From: <jyrki.saari_at_...>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 15:45:51 +0300

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext [mailto:eivind.borgeteien_at_chello.no]
> Sent: 19 May, 2003 15:06
> To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: RE: [NetEpic ML] Digest Number 1216
>
>
> I have a nagging suspicion that supression and such CC rules
> are very hard to introduce under the Netepic rules. Its hard
> to get them ballanced.
>

Hard: yes. Impossible: no. Unless the premise is that Net Epic does not need any new rules in which case any suggestion automatically fails by default.

> I picture an orkmob ganging up on a detachment of SM. One
> would expect that the orks lost a couple of more units than
> the SM. I cant really picture an intire orkmob withdrawing
> just because it has lost 5 or 6 stands of a mob perhaps
> containing over 20.
>

Like said: there are bonuses for outnumbering the enemy. Besides, once the BASIC system has been tested exceptions can be made, if needed. Like: if enemy is wiped out there's no need to withdraw. Or if you outnumber the enemy by 2x or more _after_ combat resolution you don't need to withdraw even if you lose. Etc.

The design flow should be from general cases to the specific. Not vice versa.

> Eivind
[snip]
>

Jyrki Saari
Received on Mon May 19 2003 - 12:45:51 UTC