RE: [Epic] Rants. Was SM/TL vs E40K unit costs

From: Miller, Chris <CMiller_at_...>
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 17:48:44 -0600

> Holy crap Chric, that was quite the rant. All you had to say is it's a
>
> game, If it was real warfare over a tactically important piece of
> land,
> then tactical missile strikes would have softened up the enemy to the
> point where it can no longer be considered a fair fight. The short
> ranges
> and close combat, are to make you think how to play the GAME, not
> fight a
> real war. The banners and bright colours make the game look nice, a
> game
> with all camo'd marines looks really REALLY dull.
> Steve
>
-------> I didn't think it was that bad. I agree with a lot of
Looneyman's posts, just not this one. Sure it doesn't make sense in
reality, but this game is nuts compared to reality - I mean "Ork
Gargants." Consider the concept vs reality for a moment. Really. It's
insane. But it's damn fun to paint and play...

Also, I've painted a whole ton of battletech mini's in camo, and I don't
need another dose of that, though I admit I'm sometimes tempted to put
back banners on a few, just to annoy the local mechwarriors guild.

And to pull back to another thread, I'm picking up some micro armor and
trying some different rulessets for them. I also grabbed Full Thrust and
DBA, though DBM and a decent naval game remain on the list. That Catan
game and the Imperial thing are in there too. I been a busy boy...now if
only my wife doesn't find out...
: )

Chris Miller
Reality is fine, but...
"Hey, the Bismarck _might_ have had to meet the Yamato..."
Received on Wed Mar 04 1998 - 23:48:44 UTC