[NetEpic ML] Re: Heresy Summary

From: Peter Ramos <pramos2_at_...>
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2000 17:51:05 -0600

Hi!
Big fan of suppression. This seems a bit close to E40K however... Hell,
might as well call them Blast Markers ;) It looks ok on first glance
though - did you alter how target's gain suppression counters?
No that remains the same.

> >All titan weapons add d3 counters or suppression
> >All artillery add one chit per 2 BP of the attack, meaning a converging
> >attack will cause lots more suppression than an open sheaf attack.
>
> Do titan guns add 1d3 EXTRA or 1d3 in total (Instead of normal
> suppression)??

Uh oh, random suppression markers...don't like this much. Especially since
while it makes sense for some weapons, but not others. By the logic of D3
for something like an volcano cannon why do rapid fire weapons like
lasblasters have the same? Rocket launchers? Why would this suppression
affect both infantry and vehicles the same? It causes more consistency
problems then it is worth IMHO. Keep the standard suppression system and try
to avoid random determinination.
It doesn't need to be rabdom that was a suggestion. It can be a fixed amount. Of course isn't just as simple to give d3?

The less important mechanics like suppression come down to the random roll
of the dice the better.

> >I will increase the suppression of anti-infantry weapons versus armored
> >units back to 1/2 total value
>
> Good.

Ugh! I thought we already decided on the original system for a reason? A
machine gun will NOT suppress a tank - I don't care HOW many rounds you fire
at the thing. Unless RPGs or other rockets are flying a tank will not be
suppressed by infantry.
Come on Ken, you were a ex-marine, just read about WWII, heck the gulf war, anti-personel rounds suppress armored units all the time. Its not because it can actually do damage, it doesn't, its all the psycology of being shot at and the confusion it causes.

I say keep the currect rules unless they are PROVED to be broken - not
changed for changes sake.


If it's not broke don't "fix" it until it is.
The thing is Ken playtesting IS showning to be broke. Every day i come from work and while I am on the computer I wip out titans and other units nad make little battles on my desk, trying to confirm or deny what has been said. Up to now, I have to say a lot of it is on the money.
I could live without the anti-infantry affecting armored unts, but mostly everyone whose played the game wants it. The main point is there are people on this list that have played more Heresy than me or you who made the game, so I'm willing to go along with it.
Also the changes, being suggested are things that I or you had originally thought of but for whatever reason discarded. Everything that has been suggested I am playing myself to assure it is okay. Its okay until now.

Peter
Received on Wed Mar 08 2000 - 23:51:05 UTC