Re: DS: Walkers

In article <20030207174857.74158.qmail@web20310.mail.yahoo.com>, Brian
Bilderback <greywanderer987@yahoo.com> writes
>From a realism standpoint it's arguably very
>well-thought out. 

Thank you.

> From a gaming standpoint, it may be
>too harsh (unless you WANT it harsh).

I do. Actually, one other thing I need to incorporate is the difficulty
something that high off the ground (especially if bipedal) will have in
finding hull down positions. (Snicker, that's another one mech games
seem to overlook!)

>And while I felt they favored necha TOO heavily, they
>were what the game was about, and some people like
>them -- so I'd rather see them as a balanced option,
>with strengths and drawbacks, not something that's
>overpowering to the point of dominance, NOR restricted
>to the point of irrelevance.

Many years ago (pre Clan) I read a very interesting series of Battletech
design philosophy articles by a veteran player in a magazine. His final
article covered his discovery that a well designed force of GEV could
take out an equivalent or 'superior' force of mechs EVERY time. He
apparently used to demonstrate this at clubs and cons. I was amazed that
actually Battletech had got something plausible.
Cheers
-- 
Symon Cook (founder member of Camros)(The Campaign for Real Operating
Systems).
.....
"You fertility deities are worse than Marxists," he said. "You think
that's all 
that goes on between people."

Roger Zelazny, Lord of Light. 1971.