Re: [NetEpic ML] Agreement?

From: Peter Ramos <pramos2_at_...>
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 21:16:16 -0500

Hi!

> Hi All!
>
> Hey, looks like I started a LOT of good discussion. Peter has changed
> his position SO many times, I'm sure he's a little dizzy. ;)

Hehe, somewhat. There's been a LOT of real good ideas, hard not to like
them, even though after some thought one realizes they may not be the way to
go, they still

> Points I think we all agree on, and that ANY new rule should address:
>
> 1) Titans should not be all powerfull, infantry/vehicles should have a
> chance against them. The difficulty is in striking a good ballance.
> You don't want the infantry too powerfull either.
>
> 2) Titans need to be able to Close Combat any type of unit (except
> flyers of course), and the rules should have provision for this.
>
> 3) Better units, in combat with a titan, should have a better chance to
> damage it.
>
> 4) Troops in combat with a titan should have some small chance for
> survival. The chance for survival should increase, the more damage is
> done to the titan.

Pretty clear points and they address what we are looking for.

> Keep in mind, that only titans, can pin titans. This means that the
> chance of an infantry/vehicle swarm, will be rare. Most players tend to
> move thier titans last.

True. Good point!

> Thunderhawks, and other fast units, are not THAT big a problem. Without
> being able to pin, Marines must move AFTER the titan does, to engage it.
> Unless it's on first fire. In THAT case, the titan gets to shoot the
> troops, before they can close assault, should the titan wish to.

Very true as well. Also a t-hwak brings only one detachment it becomes
hrader to coordinate more than one to go after one titan with all the
dangers on the battlefield.

> Did I miss anything?

That pretty much covers all the complaints and suggestions.

> Stand by for my New Warprat's rules!

Hehe, can't wait to see them.

Peter
Received on Tue Apr 18 2000 - 02:16:16 UTC