Re: [OFFICIAL] FMA range thoughts...

>Now that everyone has had a few days to digest the FMA test draft
stuff, I
>want to start throwing out a few other ideas that we've had as
alternatives
>to some of the draft rules, to see what people think of them.

Yes, yes yes! I like this better than range bands.

>Pros of this concept: more realism due to better troops being able to
hit
>at greater ranges; it has a good "feel" to it, I think. Commonality of
>ideas with SGII.
>Cons: a bit more complex than original method; may give some odd
results at

More complex? Not so! especially if one is coming in from SGII.

This system reinforces the underlying notion behind all the GZG systems:
troop quality is vastly more important than any particular type or
amount of gadgetry. This is a good thing, and will hopefully reduce the
tendency to come up with the "Special SWAT Shotgun" that has a close
range band of 24"... rather, the focus is on having special SWAT
troopers that can kill with anything they can lay hands on. It's the
men, not the machines! Unless we're talking about 'bots, of course...

>whereas an elite with same gun gets 6/12/18" for snap and 12/24/36" if
>aimed - but is this REALLY unreasonable, in the light of  real-life
>examples quoted on the list?)

Not at all. As someone else pointed out, the effective range of most RL
weapons is off-the-board in FMA scale. However using that range is
highly dependent on the skill of the user.

>So, opinions anyone? This is the sort of rule where we are going to
have to
>go for an either/or decision, rather than allowing the option of both -
it
>is too fundamental to the core system. Does this feel better than the
>fixed-range version, and is the extra complication worth it?

The extra complication is paltry when compared with the benefits of
maintaining a close relationship to SGII and the effect of making troop
quality more important than hardware. Make it so. :)

--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.