> Personally I would have liked to seen crit charts somewhat like:
> =
2 : Catastrophic Damage
> 3 : Reactor Hit / Deep Wound / Etc.
>=
4-6 : Weapon Hits
> 7 : Glancing Hit / Flesh Wound
> =
8-10 : Mobility Hits
> 11 : Reactor Hit / Deep Wound / Etc.
> =
12 : Catastrophic Damage
> where weapons hits are always random for r=
ight/left splits (ie. 6 =
> Carapace Hit, 1-3 left carapace weapon, 4-6 r=
ight). Expand the extremes
> for smaller war machines.
I agree.
I don't =
think anyone has mentioned this, so I will. The only problem I see with thi=
s chart is that for 2D6 probablitis are pretty simetrical(sp?) around the n=
umber 7. So a average roll causes little damage, while now a average crit c=
auses some additonal damage and an excepionally low one cause little damage=
, while an exceptionally high one causes lots of damage. I think they way t=
hey did it makes more sense, however I agree with you about the chart being=
balanced.
That is my comments.
-James
- application/ms-tnef attachment: stored
Received on Wed Apr 16 1997 - 21:15:03 UTC