Prev: Re: grav Next: Amour and Walkers was [Re: grav ]

Re: Walkers, was RE: grav

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:19:46 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Walkers, was RE: grav


--- Laserlight <laserlight@quixnet.net> wrote:
> From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com>
> 
> > They are in there for battletech idiots who love
> Giant Robots[tm].
> >  They were never intended to be balanced against
> tanks
> > because Giant Robots are a lousy military idea.
> 
> In this ficton.  I'm not a Battletech player myself
> but I can see why
> some people find it fun.  If you can come up with
> PSB to support it
> with a reasonably straight face, and it's fun, why
> not?	Also, it can
> lead to some very impressive paint jobs, since after
> all there's not
> much point in putting camo on them...

I'm a Battletech player--and one of the most enjoyable
things about that was smacking around mech jocks with
tanks even under the handicaps of that ruleset.  But I
don't delude myself that large walkers belong in a
hard SF setting.

John

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals


Prev: Re: grav Next: Amour and Walkers was [Re: grav ]