Re: [Epic] Disrupts Idea

From: J Andrew Evans <J_Andrew_Evans_at_...>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 16:08:45 +0100

Certainly, I think something needs to be done to circumvent the "huge number of BMs" problem as getting 17+ BMs on a single
detachment blows it out of a normally long game. The converting to hits idea is a good one for as you say monofilament wire must
kill someone eventually. The system you suggest strikes me as complex as it involves a lot of checking up on detachment Morale
etc which will disturb the game flow (which for me is a strenth of Epic). Wonder if some arbitrary limit like 10 wouldn't be
better as smaller detachments would be more likely to be surpressed than bigger ones so the bigger ones more likely to sort
themselves out.

Alternatively, why not allow a "lucky" removal of more BMs on occasion. If the BM removal roll was a 6 roll a second dice and
add both numbers together. Therefore there would be a chance of removing 11 BMs in one turn if the dice went your way.

A#

Solzak_at_... wrote:

> In a message dated 9/23/98 10:45:41 PM Central Daylight Time, greg_at_...
> writes:
>
> << Some of my 'Epic' friends (truly BIG folk ... sorry!) and I have been
> discussing the Disrupts (excessive) points we have touched on here
> recently. We like Thane's groups' idea about not deducting from Morale
> Points ay BM's in excess of the detachments total MP's. However, we
> think this does not entirely cover the effects we would like to
> recognize.
>
> Our thought is that the larger the detachment ... more points also means
> more MP's, the more BM's it can absorb before the suppression effect
> starts to become a dispersion and disorganization effect. We are
> thinking that once a detachment has as many BM's on it as necessary to
> be equal to its MP's, then additional BM's would be converted to "hits"
> or a unit destroyed. Our initial thought is to have every two BM's
> convert to 1 hit. However, this could be a different ratio, more
> variable and/or possibly race dependent. Our initial thought is that
> the Defender would select the unit to be "hit" or destroyed ...
> destroyed may be the better term, since we do not see allowing them to
> select a unit with a "Save", at least as long as another unit was
> available to be hit.
>
> This seems to address the rules problem or 'cheese shop' issue of
> excessive BM's causing a victory without combat.
>
> First, what do you think of this idea in general?
>
> Second, who would be willing to do some playtest to see what the correct
> ratio of BM's to units destroyed should be and how the rule would work
> in general? >>
>
> Personally it sounds great to me...It really does make since when you think
> about it...Monophiliment wire has to shred SOMETHING. Biovores have to land
> spores on SOMETHING. Snot from the contagions has to hit SOMONE. I personally
> love the idea.
>
> Scott
Received on Thu Sep 24 1998 - 15:08:45 UTC