Re: [Epic] Net Epic

From: Aaron P Teske <Mithramuse+_at_...>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 13:33:27 -0500 (EST)

Excerpts from Epic: 31-Jan-97 Re: [Epic] Net Epic by "Cameron Bentsen"_at_nortel
> I disagree. What you're actually talking about here is a unit that is
> slightly undervalued. What we really should do is get rid of the "half-point
> hosing" (as you put it) and make the Bloodletters be worth 175 VP (and worth
> 1.75 VP, or 7 VP, or whatever.) There really is no excuse for not making
> units have VPs directly related to what they are worth, providing you ensure
> that all units are properly balanced to their effectiveness!
>
[snip]
>
> Once again, the main problem is that there is too broad a range of
> effectiveness for things that are worth 150 VP. In order to correct this, we
> need a finer scale (i.e. 25 point increments) and if we're going to do that,
> we should keep partial VPs (or multiply by 4, or whatever) in order to
ensure > that things are really worth what they say they are worth.

Eh... I dunno. Being a Squat player, I tend to see the points value of
a unit and the VPs they cough up as not so strictly related. After
starting to design ships in Full Thrust, where there are two scales
(mass and points) used to balance ships, this belief was reinforced.
While EPIC PV and VP should still be tied together, a direct 1:1 (or
25:1, or whatever) relation is, IMO, too strict. You might as well just
count up how many points of troops each side has left. Making some
units give more VPs when they break would be a good balancing factor for
their effectiveness.

Take Squats. Everyone knows how hard the large companies are to break;
a 22-model company breaks at 17, for example. But then, that's why the
Squats give out more VPs: because they're harder to break. If you
increased the points cost of the companies to match the VPs, though, the
Squats would never win: they'd be *severely* outnumbered in every
situation.

Now, that's not to say that the people working on Net EPIC were going to
do that to the Squats; in fact, I'm fairly sure you weren't. However,
you might consider using the Squat-type formula (though I don't think
there's an actual formula) on some of the harder-to-break units, like
Bloodletters, Trolls, Carnies, Long Fangs, etc.

                    Aaron Teske
                    Mithramuse+_at_...
Received on Fri Jan 31 1997 - 18:33:27 UTC