duckrvr_at_... wrote:
>
> Thanks for agreeing with me, I think . . .
Your welcome. Yes I was agreeing with you.
>
> Silly? You mean like the fact that the jetbikes can only fly at 35mph?
> (Assuming human running speed = roughly 10mph in battel gear) Or hover
> tanks are slower than our current ground tanks? (25mph on charge for a
> falcon, vs. a 45-50 mph cruising speed [60mph top] for an M-1A1 Abrams)
Yes, I do think that ALL movement is to low. Way to low in some cases.
> If you want your artillery off board, then you should have to name your
> coordinates the turn before (or farther in advance) of when it hits. If you
> need rationalization, then assume they need the reduced range so their
> tracking systems can accurately engage quick moving targets effectively, or
> perhaps othe anti-artillery technology comes into play at long ranges (Star
> Wars Defense System stuff shooting down warheads, or worse, diverting them).
No the allready have a system for dealing with off board arty. It's
called "scatter dice". The current system works just fine, and in fact
has a rather nice touch, in that it shows the difference between a
generic spotter and a dedicated foward observer. A spotter is any body
on your radio net, who may or may not have any training in calling in
fire. So fire called in by them scatters. (This is the current
"indirect fire" rule. If you happen to have one of the models that has
recon unit attached to it (squat SHV, Landing pad on a Titan) you get a
direct link, by some one that does know what he is about, so the fire
does not scatter. The only thing that I would need to be added would be
the concept of a FO stand. Let me think about this and post the rules
that I come up with.
Received on Wed Feb 19 1997 - 20:29:10 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:09:09 UTC