Hmmm, I think that it would be best to stick to the d6, but we could perhaps
allow Panther, Tigers and Josef Stalins 2d6 saving throws, Of course we
won't need to make every type of vehicle in the war available. After all
theres not that many stats to toggle around.... and a hell of a lot of
different weapons.
Nils
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jyrki.saari_at_nokia.com [SMTP:jyrki.saari@...]
> Sent: 4. september 2000 09:37
> To: netepic_at_egroups.com
> Subject: RE: [NetEpic ML] Epic WW1
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: EXT nils.saugen_at_... [mailto:nils.saugen@...]
> > Sent: 04. September 2000 10:16
> > To: netepic_at_egroups.com
> > Subject: RE: [NetEpic ML] Epic WW1
> >
> >
> > -------------------------- eGroups Sponsor
> > -------------------------~-~>
> > GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds! Get rates
> > of 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Ongoing APR* and no annual fee!
> > Apply NOW!
> > http://click.egroups.com/1/7872/6/_/7255/_/968051851/
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > -------_->
> >
> > I think that you should sacrifice historical corectness with
> > making things
> > as simple as possible. Taking IG as a starting point is
> > excellent, and most
> > infantry units should be more or less the same depending on
> > from what period
> > of the war you'd like to play.
> >
> > You could make some variations to the rules for chain of
> > command, amount ov
> > veteran/elite troops, vehicle stats (Now, thats a lot of work!!!!),
> > availability of special types of units (depending on which
> > area/teatre you
> > want to play). I guess you could use NetEpic rules as a base
> > for most types
> > of historical wargames. However, I think that roughriders are
> > somewhat more
> > efficient than their polish lancer comrads form the beginning of WWII.
>
> If we decide to go for this I just wonder whether the EpicWWII could use
> d10
> or even d12 instead of d6? This would allow more variety in to-hit rolls
> and
> saving throws while not changing the basic mechanics of play.
>
> >
> > I guess the basic units would include, infantry with standard IG stats
> > (veterans/elite to include mainly better to hit rolls, more
> > attacks and
> > armour value, to keep the emphasis away from close combat),
> > Bazooka/anti-tank guns with hwy.weapon stats and machine gun
> > crews with
> > Tarantula stats.
> >
> > Early WWII tank units should really suck when it comes to
> > armour value,
> > range, firepower, armour piercing capability and CAF,
> > continuing that line
> > of thought the T34 should be close to a Land Raider with a
> > turret and, I
>
> I would make T-34 more like a Leman Russ without the hull gun. KVs would
> be
> more like Land Raiders but slower. Early PzIII and IV would have saves of
> 5+
> in the d6 scale. I & II would have 6+.
>
> > guess the TIGER I and II's should come close to a Shadowsword
> > in stats.
> >
>
> Here is the reason why I would suggest adopting a d12 as the base die. For
> NetEpic it would be too much trouble but since we start from scratch here
> it
> would be feasible. The d6 would make a Panther and a Tiger I, for example,
> equal in armor while there was a significant difference.
>
> > This would of course be an enourmous task indeed, and I guess
> > there would be
> > considerable differences of opnion and hard debates on the
> > subject......
> > Sounds like a lot of fun!
> >
>
> Definetely. I am really interested in this if it becomes an actual
> project.
> I might even do Finnish TO&E if yoú ask nicely ;-)
>
> > Nils
> >
> > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> > http://profiles.msn.com.
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
>
> Jyrki Saari
>
> -There is no such thing as free lunch because eating takes time and time
> is
> money.
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
Received on Mon Sep 04 2000 - 07:49:59 UTC