Hi!
I dont agree. If the warriors have a 0 CAF the squats have very few OK CC
troops. I dont ever use the thunderers av CC troops. They are too valuable
as fire support. I think the high cost is OK even without the +1 CAF
Eivind
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Barr [mailto:jimebarr_at_...]
Sent: 13. april 2000 04:01
To: netepic_at_egroups.com
Subject: [NetEpic ML] Re: New polls
Hello,
I think the thunderer/warrior CAFs are fine as they are, with the
thundys being veterans and whatnot, and their high relative cost.
Jim
--- In netepic_at_egroups.com, "Peter Ramos" <pramos2_at_u...> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I will put up some new issues to vote on. I will only include those
major issues, small ones like changing the cost of the Squat cannons
and the apparent typo between thunderers and warriors and mega-
gargant gun deck range, I'll just edit without need for a vote. Of
course if their is an outcry for it, it can be voted on.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.6 Million Digital Images!
Download one Today from Corbis.com
http://click.egroups.com/1/3356/3/_/7255/_/955591258/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
#########################
This message has been scanned for viruses with F-Secure Anti-Virus for
Microsoft Exchange and it has been found clean.
For more information about computer viruses, connect to
http://www.F-Secure.com/vir-info/.
#########################
Received on Thu Apr 13 2000 - 09:00:34 UTC