Re: [Epic] Net Epic

From: Tony Christney <acc_at_...>
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 14:48:21 -0800

>>
>> Hi guys!
>>
>> As is my custom nowadays I was reviewing todays opinions on movement and
>> initiative. What is interesting is that two systems seem to have the
>> publics approval. One is the one I posted based on unit type(Titans move
>> first etc.)and the other was Tony's idea(units move according to orders
>> ie. charge first etc.).
>
>My vote is still to use alternating movement, nothing else. I like the idea
>of having different phases for different classes of model, however I don't
>want the added complication. Maybe the rules should provide this as the
>"basic" option, and phased movement should be an "advanced" optional rule.
>
>Philip

This is also a good idea. I am the sort that likes things nice and complicated
to confuse newbies so much that they get a headache ;). Having the option is
a good idea. Maybe the other way around though, with the complicated version
being the basic rules and the alternating version the simplified version.
Sort of like the the way the set-up rules are covered in the current SM, ie.
you should draw maps, but if you want a quick knock about game just alternate
units during set-up.

Tony Christney
acc_at_...
Received on Thu Feb 06 1997 - 22:48:21 UTC