On Thu 06 Feb, Peter Ramos wrote:
> Hi!
>
> This is a preliminary summary of what is the opinion on movement on
> initiative.
>
> 1-It is obvious the majority wants an alternating system for movement
> and most of the posted ones are from 1st edition epic(knowingly or not).
> The exact 1st edition system which was a order of movement dependant on
> the orders given(charge moves first then advance,etc.)was posted and
> also the problems with it have also been debated( so my vipers if given
> advance orders cant be pinned since they move always after charge
> units).The system I proposed is based on unit manuverability and size so
> this problem does not occur.My system has not really been voted against
> so please give your opinion on it with any defects you may visualize.
> If there is no concensus on exactly what type of alternating system to
> be used I suggest that Phillips suggestion of just giving simple
> alternation to the present system be used.
I have already voted that we use the system you proposed.
> 2-Regarding vehicle movement and terrain effects the foolowing is what
> seems people would like it to look like.
>
> -Troop stands- no restriction except for immpassible terrain
> -Cavalry(meaning some bipedal or quadruped mode of locomotion)-may move
> through woods at half rate(depending what orders are), this also applies
> to other difficult terrain.
> -Tracked vehicles- may only enter woods in advance orders(and no other)
> at half the advance movement. While in woods must use advance until
> woods are cleared( cannot charge out of woods).This also applies to
> other difficult terrain.
I think tracked vehicles should not be able to enter woods. This would
seriously distort the game, as you immediately removing the advantage
of the chaos vehicles and the imperial guard vehicle (I can't remember its
name), which are the only vehicles that can enter woods presently.
> -Bikes(meaning wheeled vehicles such as ork buggies, space marine bikes,
> squat bikes,etc.)Can move through wood only on advance orders at normal
> rate.
I totally against the idea that bikes and ork buggies can't in woods,
as they can in present system. Why change a rule that works well and what
is the difference between cavalry (which will be able to charge) and
bikes (that won't be able to charge)?
> -Skimmers(refering only to jetbikes as other skimmers are either too
> large or dont have means to physically displace trees-like atracked
> vehicle). They can enter woods only on advanced orders at normal rate.
> I have seen discussions about jet bikes stopping on buildings and other
> impassible terrain-remember if it is impassible to vehicles normally it
> cant stop there these rules apply to difficult terrain where before they
> were not permitted to enter.
>
I think skimmers should be able to land on builds, as long as they have
flat roofs (I can see allot of terrain building being done by none eldar
players if this idea is accepted) and in rough terrain. Tne reason being
that skimmers are not landing on the terrain, but hoovering over it. So
as long as the surface is reasonable flat, they should be able to end their
movement over it. Using the same line of argument skimmers should not be
able end theirmovement over water or marsh. Skimmers should though have the
option of charging over woods, instead of moving through them, as long they
don't end their movement in woods, in a turn in which they charged. The
reasoning being that the grav engines have enough power to enable skimmers
to 'hop' over terrain, but enough power to enable them to hover over uneven
or not so solid surfaces.
> Up to now the system I proposed has been slightly (more like barely)
> accepted in some cases with some addition,please keep commenting on them
> and if any clarification no matter how small is needing just ask-thats
> what I'm here for!
>
> United we stand!
> Peter
>
>
--
Sean Smith
Waikato Student Union General Executive Member
Mature Student and Student Services Portfolios
Home - Seans_at_...
WSU - Srsmith_at_...
--
Received on Thu Feb 06 1997 - 00:42:39 UTC