Re: [Epic] Tyranids vs Tyranids

From: J. Michael Looney <mlooney_at_...>
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 1997 09:57:16 -0500

Brett Hollindale wrote:
> I wouldn't dream of disagreeing, but I think I will have to suggest that we
> must have enormously different criteria that pertain to "best" and "worst".
>

Well let us agree to disagree

<snipage>

> Best thing about SM/TL - "flavour".

Flavour is not some thing that I look for in a wargame _rules_. What I
look for in rules is a system that hangs together and works more or less
in on clear cut way, with as few "special rules" for a given "model" as
postible. This is the "real" (read none-GW based rules) wargamer in me.
As an example to show the effects of all the weapons used on the battle
field of World War II Command Descion uses 3 types rules (Small Arms,
HE, Anti-Tank) This gives you every thing from a platoon of grunts with
rifles to 16" naval guns, by way of a flight of ME-262 fighter jets.
Granted in CD the Army list book (Armies of the 2nd World War) is
thicker than the rules and that the vehicles/weapons list booklet is
longer than the whole of the rules in basic Space Marine (2nd). The
data list book let is in the same format, more or less, as pages 57-60
of Space Marine 2nd ed.

Flavour is found in the _GAME_ (i.e. when the models are on the table
doing their thing). Because SM/TL is using the same models as E40K,
well the flavor is the same, more or less. Granted I would like more
vechicle types, but this is an effect of the above GW fluff problem.

<more snipage>


> Worst thing about E40K - "cheesy number crunching".

All point based systems, to include SM/TL have this problem. Just that
in E40K you deal with 1's and 2's, in SM/TL you deal with 50's and 100's

>
> Anyway, you pushed the button, and I responded predictably...

No sweat, I knew I would get some heat from saying SM/TL rules were
their worst rules.
Received on Sat Aug 30 1997 - 14:57:16 UTC