It's good to see that people agree with me, but I think 200 and 500 is a bit
expencive.�
�
Compared to the IG bombard-battery, with a constant BP of 9, it costs 200,
the Goliath can get 9 if the player rolls good.
�
If we compare the Artillery Company with the Goliath Company, the IG gets a
total of 33 BPs, while the Squats can get 30 if they are extremly lucky.
�
I think that 175 & 475 are fair prices.
�
An other thing that puzels me are the squat infantry. Why does the
thunderers have +1 CAF while the warriors has 0. Shouldn't it bethe other
way around?
�
Eivind
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Ramos [mailto:pramos2_at_...]
Sent: 11. april 2000 17:22
To: netepic_at_egroups.com
Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] Remaining armies Squats
Hi!
�
I agree with your points. I'd probably just round off the costs to 200 for
one goliath and 500 for the company card. Also they should be able to
destroy buildings in one blast. Hmmm.. I thought I had done that in the
rules, but maybe I missed it.
�
Peter
-Squats�
In regard to the Squats artillery, it is two inconsistencies I would like to
remove.
1)COST: When you buy a company-card you usually get it cheaper than if you
buy the same amount of troops as supportcards. The grand Battery is 50
points cheaper as a companycard, but the Goliath SH Artillery Battery is
not, so I would like to reduce the cot of the companycards.
2)EFFICIENCY: The Goliath is the biggest gun in the game, therefore it
should be able to destroy buildings in one shot. If Im not mistaken, the
only weapon the squats have that can destroy buildings is the bombard on the
Land Train. Usually you only have one of theese, while your oponents have
many. (Like Tech Guard and IG, or even worse, TG allied with IG!)
I suggest the following:
Let the Goliath as a supportcard cost 175 points, the corresponding
companycard cost 475, and let the gun raze buildings.
Any opinions?
Eivind
�
� _____ �
<
http://click.egroups.com/1/1083/3/_/7255/_/955471151/>
Win Big Prizes NOW at IGN.com!
<
http://adimg.egroups.com/img/1083/3/_/7255/_/955471151/>
� _____ �
Received on Wed Apr 12 2000 - 10:29:41 UTC