At 03:23 PM 12/2/97 +1100, you (both) wrote:
>>I said it once already, but since no one responded and I believe so strongly
>>in it I'll say it again. We should eliminate Super Heavies the size of
>>Titans and simply make them Titans.
Why?
How will this make Net Epic a better game?
Titans are Titans and super heavies are super heavies.
If you want a titan, get a titan. If you want a SHV, get a SHV.
Anyone who thinks that the models are represented to scale should try
squeezing 30 space marines into a thunder hawk... Just because Knights are
the same size as a warhound titan doesn't make the Knights titans and
neither does it make any of the super heavies mentioned below...
>>If we did this there would be an effect
>>on all of our rules debates from here on out, so it would be really
>>important for us to implement this as early as possible if we are to
>>implement it at all. There is no need to seperate a size class which is
>>clearly the same into two (titans and super heavies), as this merely adds to
>>confusion and unfairly disadvantages some units. This would eliminate the
>>need to add a morale roll for vs. "classic" sized super heavies, as large
>>tanks are simply not as frightening as the towering building-sized Capitolis
>>Imperialis, which can hold three of those large "classic" tanks in its cargo
>>holds.
I expect that most soldiers have a healthy respect for main battle tanks,
but as for a truck big enough to carry three MBT's mounting a couple of
MG's... I dunno. (I'm not a soldier, but I know which I would rather
asault!)
Agro
>
>Good point. Sorry for not seeing this earlier. I agree entirely, but which
>SHVs should be classed Titans? I can guess, so how does this look?
>
>Titans
> Capitol Imperialis
> Leviathan
> Colossus
> Cyclops
> Ordinatus (?)
>
>Any others?
>
>doddsy
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Simon Dodds
>c9415355_at_...
>http://www.geocities.com/BourbonStreet/1353/
>
>"I don't need to see the world through rose-coloured glasses, for my
> eyes are naturally bloodshot."
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
Received on Wed Feb 12 1997 - 09:32:37 UTC