[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (TFT) Time and Distance - Clarification and Response
> 1. I think that the typical movement rate of 10 was chosen more for game
> design issues than for realism. It you boost normal tactical movement to
> (say) 18, then you need a map with 4 times the area of the standard Melee
I failed to make clear that I was NOT advocating a boost to *tactical*
movement - only to sprinting full tilt. Thus, the double MA would not permit
one to make attacks of any sort - only to run.
> 2. I'd expect higher movement rates would make missile weapons even less
> useful in TFT -- attackers can just close the distance that much quicker.
Reference above. I also have given this matter some thought, but am not
ready to give out my proposed solution quite yet (bit half baked at
> 3. Other than "engagement", TFT has no mechanic to prevent "panzerbushing"
> (i.e., running around the front of a foe after he's moved). So higher MA's
> would allow far more scope for this kind of stuff. Even the current system
> allows some panzerbushing.
> At the minimum, I'd suggest that each figure gets to "pivot" (i.e. change
> facing) at the end of the movement phase. If you want to put a reasonable
> restriction on this, allow him to do this only if an enemy figure moves
> his front arc to his flank during the movement phase. I'd also prohibit
> pivoting figure from exposing a side or rear hex to any foe that was in
> of his front hexes.
Reference above. I also had pretty much the same view on the pivot move you
suggest. Ya beat me to it, ya scurvy dog! I would do it a bit different,
though, simply allowing whichever figure(s) moved first to get a free pivot
at the end of the movement phase, provided they did not exceed over half
Post to the entire list by writing to email@example.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to firstname.lastname@example.org with the message body