[NetEpic ML] Re: heresy

From: Peter Ramos <pramos2_at_...>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 17:14:47 -0600


I have come up with this rule: Within the short range of the weapon a anti-infantry weapon may affect armored units if the penetration roll is a 9+.

Hows that sound.

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Edward Philippi
  To: netepic_at_egroups.com
  Sent: Monday, March 06, 2000 11:44 PM
  Subject: [NetEpic ML] Re: heresy

  On Mon, 6 Mar 2000 10:08:09 -0600 Peter Ramos pramos2_at_... wrote:>

  I agree with giving the cannon fodder oop! I mean infantry some sort of anti-armor ability. Since WWII most troops have had some sort of armor kill weapon (the bazooka in 1943 and the L.A.W. today). I actually think the inf. should be able to kill tanks at close range with a 9 or 10. Figure each squad has a few disposable rockets or half a dozzen grenades tied together.

          You should seriously consider allowing some infantry with anti-infantry =
        weapons limited anti-armour fire ability. Perhaps, make a new weapon =

        designation called "Combined" or something similar. Units with combined >weapons fire and suppress as anti-infantry weapons, but may fire at armoure targets at short range. Eventually give them -1 or -2 on armour penetration rolls. As things are now, the mainstay of most armies, the tactical infantry, are simply cannon fodder. And while Epic scale games are very charactirized by the horrible fate of the grunts, they still deserve a chance. (BTW, I loveinfantry in Epic ;) ) Hehe, I can put inthe following rule, anti-infantry may ONLY penetrate armored unit on a roll of 10. Difficult, but possible.


  Email your boss can't read - sign up for free disinfo.net email at http://www.disinfo.com, your gateway to the underground


  eGroups.com Home: http://www.egroups.com/group/netepic
  www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
Received on Tue Mar 07 2000 - 23:14:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 10:58:53 UTC