Re: [NetEpic ML] Re: New polls

From: Peter Ramos <pramos2_at_...>
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 10:17:19 -0500

Hi!

Whoa! Calm down Luca. I know we are still discussing the finer points of it,
but its obvious we are going to change it, if not the current idea some
other thing.

Noting you're objectiions I suppose you;d prefer the alternative with higher
titan CAF and standard combat resolution. This makes "elites" able to
onflict damage with less troops since they are better.

In the end I had no intention in making it a lopsided vote, more than one
alternative besides the current idea will be on the poll.

Peter


>> Issue #1
>>
>> Warprats titan close combat rule versus leave as is.
>
>Now wait just a minute... why the poll is being put this way???
>We were discussing the finer points of it, I seem to recall!!!
>If you put it this way, it'll just be a plebiscite for option #1, as
>NO ONE is defending the old system.
>
>Peter, I really resent this. We were having a discussion. Cutting it
>down with a lopsided poll is NOT the way to go.
>
>Oh and a couple of remarks regarding titan points cost... I don't
>think 900 points of titan should be worth 900 points of CC termies,
>in
>a close combat situation. Why? Because, obviously, the CC termies are
>CC specialists. The titan, unless armed for that purpose, is **NOT**.
>
>Try tackling in CC 900 point of Chaos marines with 900 points of
>tarantulas and let's see what happens. Does this mean tarantulas are
>not worth their points cost? No, it just means you're using them in a
>stupid way.
>
>The titans are mobile fire support platform, and they're GOOD in that
>role. No unit in the game is really worth its point cost both in CC
>and in short/medium/long range firepower. And yet that's exactly what
>you're trying to do with titans.
>I can understand the longing for the good old AT days when titans
>ruled the field, but this is NetEpic. I LIKE the units and their
>different roles, and see no need to make titans the only units in the
>game able to retain top-level efficiency in every combat situation.
>
>I can already envision ludicrous army lists with plenty of titans and
>a few cheap cannon fodder ruling the field. And why not? An
>adequately
>equipped titan has plenty of firepower, and now you're making it
>next-to-invulnerable to infantry attacks. It also has an ablative
>defense system, which means until you drop the shields it retains its
>full offensive capabilities, unlike any other unit type in the game.
>All that remains is infantry and superheavies shooting at it (since
>even superheavies are inferior in CC anyway), something which you can
>take care of by the cheap cannon fodder. These rules make fielding
>titans a no-brainer, and that's a big NO-NO in my "handbook of the
>perfect wargame".
>
>I stand my case: a whole company of elite CC troops assaulting a
>titan should rip it to shreds with little losses. If you've put your
>titan in such a situation, by all means, you **DESERVE** to die!
>And the saves won't do it. Termies would suffer a 66% loss, and those
>are TERMIES, for crying out loud! Mini-titans by themselves,
>fluff-wise. Any other unit type would just get slaughtered no matter
>what, even if they won the CC by a billion points.
>
>
>Luca Lettieri
Received on Thu Apr 13 2000 - 15:17:19 UTC