you are right but, is it fair to have your five assult troops pile on just one of my five assult troops or should they have to pair up one on one first. Or better example should 10 of your IG troops be able to single out just two of my termies or should they have to ingauge all four of them with equal effort. I thing the equal effort is the fair and right way combat would work, I'm sure the other to termies would not just stand there and say (wow look at brother Morfis with 7 Orcks on his back, HE HE he sure looks like he is having a hard time of it, looks like when we were tring to tackle him in the football game last tuesday)
----- Original Message -----
From: quester
To: netepic_at_egroups.com
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 4:41 PM
Subject: RE: [NetEpic ML] Re: Core rule interpretations
Hi all
does it matter if you pile on in a combat its part of the games tactics. if you pile on to much you loose out on attacking troops and if not enough you can loose the combat. its all a part of the game and in the 11 years i ve played its never bothered me it rewords a player for attacking in force numbers win, its all tactics
peter ramos <ramospeter_at_hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi!
<groan> It IS very difficult. The game mechanic does not give much le-way
because the CAF values are setup for stand-to-stand close combat not as a
group.
To limit one detachment assaulting one detachment is also a bad idea because
sometimes its useful to pin more than one detachment with one detachemnt or
mob, so thats not the way either.
hmmm.. most of the ideas I come up with invlove to much change or the rules.
Unless someone has a burst of genius on this, I'm stuck!
Peter
>We might say that one detachment, no matter what the size, can only charge
>one detachment. This leads to (at least) one problem, however, I can see a
>whole clan of Orks being forced to charge an aspect warrior unit...
>Although
>it is kind of Orky (Awright, ladz, now we give dose pansies a a good
>stomping, WAAAGHHHH!). Maybe an addition that if the charging detachment
>outnumbers the charged by more than 2:1 then it can charge multiple
>detachments.
>
>Damn, this is surprisingly difficult.
>
>As for the pairing, I experimented with a method, but unfortunately it
>requires some _bookkeeping_ to determine who is in CC with who, so there's
>got to be a better way to do it. C'mon, people. Get those little gray cells
>processing ;-)
>
>
> >
> > Luca Lettieri
> >
> >
> > -------------------------- eGroups Sponsor
> > -------------------------~-~>
> > Tellme Sports. Tellme Stocks. Tellme News. Just Tellme.
> > Call 1-800-555-TELL and hear everything. For info visit:
> > http://click.egroups.com/1/9529/6/_/7255/_/971877693/
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > -------_->
> >
> > 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.
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
Use Signature
Attachments: (None) Edit Attachments
Yahoo! Messenger - Send instant messages to your online friends.
Address Book � Alerts � Auctions � Bill Pay � Bookmarks � Briefcase � Broadcast � Calendar � Chat � Classifieds � Clubs � Companion � Experts �Games � Greetings � Home Pages � Invites � Mail � Maps � Member Directory � Messenger � My Yahoo! � News � PayDirect � People Search � Personals � Photos � Shopping � Sports � Stock Quotes � TV � Travel � Weather � Yahooligans � Yellow Pages � more...
Privacy Policy- Terms of Service - Guidelines
Copyright � 1994-2000 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
"Is it time to play?"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE.
eGroups Sponsor
To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
Received on Fri Oct 20 2000 - 00:44:47 UTC