Re: [Epic] Net Epic Gudelines

From: Tony Christney <acc_at_...>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 05:14:57 -0800

>Greeetings
Thank you!

[snip]

>FIRST TOPIC
>1-Army construction, present system(company cards,etc.) or a individual
>model points system(each figure assigned a point value), WHAT STAYS OR
>GOES!

IMO, the card method is preferable to an individual points system. However,
one thing that has always bugged me is that all Titans of a certain class
cost the same, no matter what the weapons fit. I think that we should
consider a method by which weapons are costed separately from the Titan
chassis.

I have been trying to work on this and this is what I have come up with so
far. I have looked at three different methods for costing weapons:

1.
WEAPON COST = RANGE * {[ATTACK DICE] + [- SAVE MODIFIER]} * [PROBABILITY OF
HIT] * n

2.
WEAPON COST = RANGE * {[ATTACK DICE] + 0.5*[- SAVE MODIFIER]} *
[PROBABILITY OF HIT] * n

3.
WEAPON COST = [RANGE] * [ATTACK DICE] * {1 - [- SAVE MODIFIER]} *
[PROBABILITY OF HIT] * n
 
Notes: n is some number between 0 and 1. It really depends on the cost of
the chassis.
This scheme only works for carapace multi-lasers, gatling blaster, laser
blaster, melta-cannon,
plasma blastgun, plasma cannon, plasma destructor, quake cannon,
turbo-laser destructor,
volcano cannon, and vulcan mega-bolter. I haven't even looked at alien
weapons, barrage
weapons, close combat weapons or one-shots.

I played with the numbers a bit, and it seems as though using scheme 2.
with n=1/4 or 1/3 and
a base cost for a warlord at 600 points. For instance, a warlord titan
armed with 3 gatling
blasters and a volcano cannon would either cost either 725 (n=1/4) or 780
(n=1/3).

Don't get the idea that I would want the WEAPON COST above to be absolute.
Some weapons have
special rules that make them more or less powerful, which should be taken
into account. Others
are either very rare or common, which should also be reflected in the cost.
These numbers
should only be considered as a starting point!

For battlegroups, the player would get a free titan chassis, but would
still have to pay full
cost for weapons.

I will be continuing on this bit, but I would like some of your input, too!


>2-Order Phase,What will each of the orders mean in terms of movement and
>firing.First Fire, Advance, Charge, Fallback

IMO, the orders phase has the least amount of ambiguity. It really should
be left
alone. The only thing that should be clarified is Fallback orders, ie. when to
make morale/break tests (immediately, end phase?).

>This first topic is short and concensus may be reached quickly so this
>topic may not need a full week.
>
>NEXT TOPIC: MOVEMENT AND INITIATIVE, A VERY HOT TOPIC!
>
>United we stand!
>Peter

Tony Christney
acc_at_...
Received on Wed Jan 29 1997 - 13:14:57 UTC