Re: [NetEpic ML] The great titan close combat debate

From: Warprat <warprat_at_...>
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 20:34:04 -0700

Hi Kelvin!

I could go for this too, WITH your alterations. For the most part, I
REALLY like it. Simple and easy, that's always good! The best rules
are always this way.

The only thing I worry about, is that EACH infantry/vehicle that wins
against the titan, would score a hit. This can be excessive. Any
ideas?

Everyone is really making this a GREAT discussion, THANKS ALL!!!!!
I think were going to end up with some AWSOME rules.


What does everyone else think?

Warprat ;)




> >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.
>
> Well, I'd support this alteration if we simply allowed the Titan to double
> its CAF when fighting any units who's class is less than Knight (this
> should include Daemons boths Greater and Lesser). This way we represent
> the Titan's antipersonnel-type weapons (Electrohulls, defence weapons,
> Poisons, spikes, ballistic Gretchin, etc...) without bothering with that
> old "Electro-Hull" rule. Plus it still makes the Titan vulnerable to
> larger units (Knights, Praetorians, other Titans, etc) and uses the current
> rules with only ONE modification.
>
> -Kelvin....
Received on Fri Apr 14 2000 - 03:34:04 UTC