RE: [SGII] Fire of AT Missiles at disperesed tagets

That is a very good point.  If it was simple and easy
for the infantry to kill armor then everything would
be infantry.

Back to doctrine control of assets <G>

I like Adrians roll for use.  That way someone can try
to use against dispersed infantry but having to roll
leans the process towards keeping them for armor.  

It also may impact the players mind that if one has to
roll to use something against infantry they may just
want to use a weapon that will work not one that might
work.

Bob Makowsky

--- "laserlight@quixnet.net" <laserlight@quixnet.net>
wrote:

> 
> If you have plenty of power, why would you screw
> around with changing the
> setting?  Leave it on "tank-killer".
> 
> Not that I agree with this premise.  If you can make
> anti-armor effective
> and in unlimited supply, there's no point in
> building armored vehicles in
> the first place.  I'd rather solve it by giving the
> players the same reason
> to conserve shots that the reall troops would have
> -- you never know when
> you might find a tank you didn't know was there....
> 
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web - Check your email from the web at
> http://mail2web.com/ .
> 
> 
> 
>