Miller, Chris wrote:
>
> > > Imperator : 7
> > > Mega Gargant : 7
> > Looks much more reasonable to be, although the '7'
> > for Imps and Megas might be a bit extreme.... Hmmm, I'll
> > have to playtest this the next time I play (whenever the
> > heck that might be).
> >
> > the problem
> > is that FP-based weaponry on WEs becomes much stronger
> > than it was previously. I guess the solution to that is
> > to keep your troops out of FP-range for the enemy's WEs...
> > which would generally be a good idea anyway.
> >
> --------> Yowch, this could be a real pain when you combine the 2 above
> thoughts - that mega gargant has 24 fp in it's gun decks which can
> shield it pretty well, and then you add 7 free BM's...
> I like this idea as an alternative to mine and the current system, but
> any kind of consistent stat-based relationship for these things seems
> like it breaks when you hit these 2 big 'uns. Maybe forcing people to
> allocate a special weapon to it before subtracting fp would balance
> things ( that is, once you take "x" markers (your free hits) you have to
> allocate all of your specials before you start marking fp), though I can
> see problems here also.
Nah, too artificial... I have to say I really like
Mark's idea, about deriving it from the old size classes.
That way it's still based off of the WE's toughness but the
numbers are quite reasonable across the board and easy to
remember as well.
Scott Shupe
shupes_at_... shupes@...
http://www.rpi.edu/~shupes
***********************************************************************
"All good people are asleep and dreaming"
Received on Mon Feb 09 1998 - 01:56:55 UTC