The great titan close combat debate

From: Peter Ramos <pramos2_at_...>
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 11:52:00 -0500

Hi!

Well it seems this one has generated a lot of flow, we'll see if it can top
the amount of mail the holofield issue produced.

Lets see:

Warprats idea is pretty good, but its main problems are:

1. Even though relatively simple its still a rule that is different from the
standard ones
2. Survivability, while there are different philosophies here, losing
everything, even when you win may be a bit harsh. A save may correct this,
but then how much different is it from what we already have?

Increased CAF's

A nice thought, as simple as can be since you are not making any rules
changes, just editing titan values. Its a real boon from the point of view
that it uses the standard combat system and no additional rules are needed.

On the downside are the high CAF's proposed high enough to make attacking
them a moot point? Dont know really. My feeling is that this is more
effective since issues of total annihilation are softened and better troops
would be better at this than cannon fodder types. No additonal die rolls are
needed because the casualties are weeded out in the standard close combat
process.

Perhaps another advantage is that the close combat potential of titan is
clearly different from other units. It always bothered me that a primarch
and a reaver have the same CAF. I think this should be so.

4d6 base roll against non-titan units

I have thought this one some more and I dont like it. It doesn't solve the
problem. In reality it gives you just two or three stands more or grace. A
IG platoon could still take it out easily.

Well lets see where peoples fancies lie. Once I see a trend then I'll throw
them up to a vote.

Peter
Received on Thu Apr 13 2000 - 16:52:00 UTC