> Miller, Chris wrote:
> > --------> In the prerelease comments, store info, and some of the WD
> > intro articles - "all your figures will be compatible" etc.
>
> That's just the miniatures. A big part, but I never got the
> impression
> they were linking the games.
>
---------> Hey, almost all the different versions of fantasy battle and
40K kept the same stats and basic sequence of play. So kill me for
expecting the same here... : )
> > -------> I think the blast marker thing would have had some
> potential,
> > and would be worth doing.
>
> How? Linked to number of dice thrown? Would higher to-hits give more
> blast markers? What about save mods? How would blast markers affect
> shots? I'm not arguing it wouldn't work, but wondering how you would
> tie it in to the rest of the system.
>
-------> I'd say # of dice thrown for a start - compare to a table like
now. The better to hit #'s and saves tend to turn into more dice anyway.
Maybe some kind of special rule for certain weapons - under special
put"1BM" or "2BM" would mean it was automatic, beyond the usual # of
dice rolled
As for effect, I like the leadership test to move - SM actually had
different morale values, so marines ain't scared as much as guardsmen.
For shooting, sure, lose one dice, weapons has to be in range to soak up
a BM, just like now.
BTW, I'm sure there are flaws in this, but I'm thinking it up in
the middile of a few other things...
> > ----------> I don't know if the game would've been any
> faster,
> > but was that the big complaint?
>
> It was for me. I'm sure that was partly the result of
> non-standardization, but also of declaring all the targets of all the
> weapons, and trying to remember which save mods and chances to hit I
> was
> applying against which targets. Handling larger groups at a time (a
> new
> detachment is bigger than an old detachment, in general) means I make
> decisions for more models at a time. I'd teach people to play, and
> they'd say they really like it, but it just took too long. I think
> the
> games I play now take a little less time and use larger armies.
------> detach to detach would make a difference for speed. You'd lose
some of what the game has been, but I'd certainly try it...
> > A bit of standardization would've fit
> > into a new system better than the different rules for every gun
> thing we
> > had, and a little more checking of cross-effects of different
> systems
> > (like the wave serpents vs void shields thing) would've certainly
> > helped, though.
>
> We used to have, as parameters for each weapon, number of shots,
> chance
> to hit, save mod, and sometimes special rules. Now we've got number
> of
> shots and special rules (which sorta all takes in save mod, in that
> you
> can make a weapon with a save mod into an AT shot). I sorta wish we
> could have gotten rid of just one of the parameters (accuracy or
> damage), rather than both (aside from SHWs). In Epic 40K, I wouldn't
> have minded throwing a pile of white dice with a few blue ones
> representing save mod 1 weapons (number is really die result +1) and
> red
> ones representing +2, or whatever.
--> In SM1 , a lascannon was a lascannon - there were just as many
stats, if not more, but a marine lascannon was the same as a lascannon
mounted on an IG tank, so instead of individual stat lines for everyones
weapon, you just had a name - kinda like SHW's now, but more variety, so
some kind of standardization like that might help. Retaining save mods
would probably eliminate the need for a seperate class of SHW's, too.
> By the way, what would you have thought about AT shots being
> implemented
> that way? When your detachment shoots, figure firepower and number of
> dice normally. Add one colored die for each AT shot. AT shots count
> as
> one more than the number rolled, and may be placed like regular FP
> dice. Maybe allow skipping over low armor targets, instead of having
> them placed front to back. Either add 2 to firepower for blast marker
> placement only, or use current SHW blast marker placement rules. Oh,
> I
> also don't like AT shots
> skipping cover. Megacannons, fine. Maybe even death rays.
--------> I'd say keep the variety in weapons from SM, but pull from a
list, so that a Gobsmasha, Gibletgrinda, Leman Russ, etc instead of
having individual slightly different stats would just say "battlecannon"
and make it easy - kinda like WH40K, I guess in that way. Between
scatter dice, artillery dice, and some colored dice like you suggest, I
don;t see any weapons system we couldn't model.
Last minute thought: count all dice rolled to hit. any "6" generates 1
BM. something like that. Eliminates one more chart, and the more things
firing at you, the more likely there's some suppression. Lots of 6's
means you picked off some officers or shot away some antennae (vehicles
or 'nids, either one)
Chris Miller
Received on Fri Feb 13 1998 - 20:38:42 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:10:19 UTC