Hi!
After "unconfusing" myself and back tracking, re-reading the posts.
While it's a good idea to have such depth and scope in a campaign style
rules, I agree with David and keep it simple.
I would like these ideas to be sent to Tom though for inclusion in
Incoming! E-zine.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: David Prentice [mailto:dprentice_at_...]
Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 2:43 PM
To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: [NetEpic ML] Aerospace Restrictions
<delurk>
Suggestion: Don't overcomplicate things.
Aerospace units and Drop Pods are suitable for all generic games, and in
a
generic game you might assume them to be usable by both sides.
The "phase" concept for Planetary Assaults is worth pursuing, but I
think
that it should be handled as a seperate campaign concept and possibly be
totally independant of the army lists themselves and the core game
rules.
Perhaps the restrictions should be scenario-specific, with a set of
scenarios written to demo NetEpic as a tree-style branching
mini-campaign.
All that would be required of the core rules and army lists would be to
provide categories for certain unit types, like Drop Pods and Aerospace.
Mycetic Spores would be a subcategory of Drop Pods, and if Drop Pods are
considered a subset of the Flier rules then everything is further
streamlined.
<lurk>
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 Jun 03 2003 - 19:57:59 UTC