Re: [Epic] Net Epic

From: Jyrki Saari <js54904_at_...>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 13:33:18 +0200 (EET)

> CONCENSUS ACHIEVED!
>
> Thank you all for the prompt reply. The majority picked the current
> rules with some minor changes. The dissentions were really directed to
> more specific army related rules that can be changed (such as some CAF
> on particular units)in the corresponding section.
>
> On subject of interest was vehicles in close combat, for now we will put
> in the backburner, but if anyone wants to playtest it in the
> interim-remember to post the results.
>
> NEXT SUBJECT:TITANS (WELL YOU ASKED FOR IT!!)
>
> Several issues that have been mentioned in the past seem to be the big
> contentions:
> 1-weapons should be paid for, therefore more powerful weapons combos
> should be worth more and thus worth more Vp's.

I agree about the weapon costs but I don't think the weapons should affect the
VPs.

> 2-titans are the powerful death machines of the games, bring back AT
> rules make it difficult for anything but a titan to destroy a titan in
> close combat

Hear hear!

> 3-What other ways to make titans truely stronger

I think the above is enough.

> Keep the following in mind the above is intended to accomplish several
> things:
> 1-make titans expensive, for those lovers of background(as I am), titans
> are supposed to be scarce, therefore a decent sized battle(4000-6000),
> should have no more than one or two at best
> 2-Thier power and stamina should reflect the cost(the AT close combat
> rules do a lot for this aspect).
>
> I have some views on point 3 above, but will wait to hear from everyone
> to express thiers before I post them.
>
> REMINDER: We are not yet done with the basic phases just yet as flyers
> and psionics need to be dealt with, due to popular demand I have
> postpone this discussion until after the titan issue.
>
> FIRE AWAY!!!!

Zapzapzap Kapow! :)


> United we stand!
> Peter
>
Jyrki Saari
js54904_at_...
Received on Thu Feb 20 1997 - 11:33:18 UTC