Re: [Epic] Blast Markers

From: <pentacle_at_...>
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 1998 02:43:39 -0500

At 11:51 AM 3/30/98 -0600, you wrote:
>Ok, warning this is a rant.
>
><rant>
>Several persons on the list have complained that the current blast marker
>rules "end the game to soon" or "make objective not important" or other
>such like, and have suggested rules to fix said same problem.

I was wondering if you liked the whole system of BM's. I agree with the
affects of BM's up to but not includig the morale values. It does end a
battle too quickly with the current rules. Being able to cripple or even
defeat an army with the use of artillery and bargage has some historical
truth, it akes the game a lot less fun. My group plays blast marker as a
tactical disadvantage without including the Morale effects.

As an amateur histirian I understand that morale has a big effect on army
ability. It can not be totally ignored, but too many people spend too much
time finding the holes in a system. I would never respect a victory based
on my opponents ability to hit my groupings with blast markers, to rack up
victory points. I am able to concede a fight to a group better deployed and
better planned, but I refuse to loose because his group has better BM
potential, and lkewise I will not take a win when I have placed enough BM's
to win but do not control the field.

I am sorry for renting but this BM win thread has been digging at me.

                President SNTN
                Aerich Frodoson

        We the members of Say No To Nids, have determines that for the sake
        of unsupspecting Terminators, Imperial Guard Cavalry, Exarcts, and Mekboy
        Warwagonz, that the continuation of the playing of these atrocities is
        against the best interest of our armies.
Received on Wed Apr 01 1998 - 07:43:39 UTC