>>IMO, deathrays, AT, and FP are the way to bring titans down, not
>>barrages.
>
>It still will be. Using a 35-50 pt unit to place 3 fp on a titan is not
>terribly efficient.
What it means is artillery will be scoring 3x as many hits on WEs as before
and not paying for the increased ability. I don't like that idea, since
I don't envision artillery as titan hunters, and I don't think artillery
needs to be souped up. I also don't like the idea of adding 2nd-ed.-type
special rules that present a new source of possible rules conflict/abuse.
Nor do I see how the game will be significantly improved by the addition
of a "reality" based special rule (which, IMO, has an arguable basis
to begin with). This seems to be the very sort of thing e40k was trying
to get away from.
^^^^^
Oh you mean 'reality'? Yeah, I think they were trying to get away from it to ;).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Your incorrect assumptions are threefold."
"You assume law still reigns in the Five Galaxies"
"You assume that we would be bound by precedents and precepts from the last 10 million years."
"But your most incorrect assumption of all is to assume that we care."
-David Brin, Infinity's Shore
-----------------------------------------------------James Nugent----------------------------------------
- application/ms-tnef attachment: stored
Received on Tue Jun 17 1997 - 11:44:34 UTC