-----Original Message-----
From: Lorenzo Canapicchi <canapi_at_...>
To: netepic_at_egroups.com <netepic_at_egroups.com>
Date: Friday, March 17, 2000 3:42 AM
Subject: [NetEpic ML] Re: The Great Holofield Debate. Vote Now!
>Kelvin wrote:
>> Model 3:
>> Remain with the old rules but _any_ barrage shot against a
Holo-protected
>> thing (even direct) _must_ scatter as indirect. After all if you really
>> don't know where something is you cannot directly fire against it, this
>> sound more simple and fits more with the idea of Holofield. (But consider
>> the problems I have posted earlier!)
>
>I vote this (obviously) and I really don't see problems as I wrote in
>the other message.
>
I like it too. Simple, placates Eldar players, not too powerful.
>> Model 6:
>> Let the Holofields give their save against barrages, but unlike
direct-fire
>> weapons, this save is subject to the barrage's save modifier. This way,
>> the Titan gets SOME protection from barrages, but doesn't become too
immune
>> to them.
>
>I really don't understand whhy a "more pounching" modifier could affect
>precision of fire... maybe a wide shape or area could be, but save
>modifier.... seems not so good to me.
>
While 6 is not my choice, I think you misunderstand travis' arguments.
He's not saying that "more punch" = precision. We are talking about a
barrage, here. What Trav is saying is that the TSM's of a barrage
represents the differences in the force/materials used in the barrage
weapon. I.E...the more shrapnel/explosive/concussive power of the weapon,
the higher the chances of the titan getting hit by it.
b
>--
>Lorenzo Canapicchi
>mailto:canapicc_at_...
>mailto:canapi_at_...
>
>Personal Page:
>http://www.cli.di.unipi.it/~canapicc
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Special Offer-Earn 300 Points from MyPoints.com for trying _at_Backup
>Get automatic protection and access to your important computer files.
>Install today:
>http://click.egroups.com/1/2344/3/_/7255/_/953282240/
>
>-- Create a poll/survey for your group!
>-- http://www.egroups.com/vote?listname=netepic&m=1
>
>
>
Received on Fri Mar 17 2000 - 11:47:17 UTC