>2-the Vp's will still conform to 100 per 1 Vp (or if over 50 round up).
I thought we devalued the point system to eliminate rounding errors?
>Also some have said that these attacks should not produce catastrophic
>damage and the old rules express as much so I propose that the damage
>roll be halved so at worst it will severly damage the leg ,but produce
>no KO'es!
While I've favoured everything making Titans stronger until now, and liked
most of your post, I do not like this. I want strong Titans, but not
virtually unkillable Titans. That halving the damage means that infantry
will need sixes and fives to inflict any damage the Titan will notice. I
support all of your ideas but this one.
>NOTE: THE OLD AT RULES WERE MODIFIED TO FIT THE REALITY OF THE PRESENT
>RULES SYSTEM(THE CONCEPTS OF SUPERFICIAL AND CRITICAL DAMAGE NO LONGER
>EXSIST). I HAVE USED THESE FOR YEARS AND THE EFFECT IS THE SAME AS THE
>OLD RULES.
And in the old rules, despite Titans being very tough, which I liked, an
army that wasn't primarily Titans _always_ lost, which I didn't like. A
single Warhound detachment could just run up and down enemy vehicle and
infantry lines and slaughter them all with complete ease. So this rules
system of yours is playtested? What were the results?
Mike the Liu
Received on Fri Feb 21 1997 - 03:18:34 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:09:10 UTC