RE: Critical hits (was Limits on armour?)
From: "McCarthy, Tom \(xwave\)" <Tom.McCarthy@x...>
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2006 14:23:44 -0400
Subject: RE: Critical hits (was Limits on armour?)
Personally, I find the second threshold check to be huge. Many ships
are still nasty combatants until that 2nd threshold check. And then,
suddenly, they become almost toothless.
And that's why I find ships with lots of armour and screens really
annoying. Against standard beams, you might have to throw huge amounts
of dice to force that second threshold check.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: awgoodall@gmail.com [mailto:awgoodall@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Allan
> Goodall
> Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 2:18 PM
> To: gzg@firedrake.org
> Subject: Re: Critical hits (was Limits on armour?)
>
> On 7/7/06, McCarthy, Tom (xwave) <Tom.McCarthy@xwave.com> wrote:
> >
> > In FT, checking systems at the end of a row of hull boxes is a
simple
> > mechanism for attrition of systems.
>
> I like attrition. I'm just not crazy about the lack of granularity in
> the FT system. The ship is perfectly okay up through the point where
> there is one hull point left on that hull row line... then things fall
> apart with one damage point suffered.
>
> That having been said, the cure is far worse than the disease from
> what I've seen.
>
> Oh, and the Command and Colors games (Memoir 44, Battle Cry, Command &
> Colors: Ancients) has an even more severe lack of granularity. An
> infantry unit has 4 figures. It is 100% effective until it loses the
> last figure, then it disappears. And yet this system is my favourite
> board game system. Go figure.
>
> --
> Allan Goodall http://www.hyperbear.com
> agoodall@hyperbear.com
> awgoodall@gmail.com