Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.

Dismiss

[HGML] heavygear-digest V4 #1001

1 view

Skip to first unread message

[HGML] heavygear-digest

unread,

Mar 1, 2001, 1:53:54 PM3/1/01

[HGML] heavygear-digest Thursday, March 1 2001 Volume 04 : Number 1001

|########################################################
| The HeavyGear mailing list Digest edition is presently
| available through Rec.Games.Mecha.
|
| Although reply/followup to this digest is discouraged,
| if you do reply by E-mail or followup in the newsgroup,
| please trim all excessive pieces.
|
| To join the HeavyGear mailing list, send a an E-mail
| to Majo...@coffeehaus.cx with the single line
| "subscribe heavygear".
|
| To join the HeavyGear mailing list *DIGEST*, send a
| an E-mail to Majo...@coffeehaus.cx with the single
| line "subscribe heavygear-digest".
|
|#######################################################
| This edition contains the following topics:
|=======================================================
Re: [HGML]heavy gear at Orccon 2001 -part 2 (was New Releases for Heavy Gear)
[HGML] Heavy Gear Tournament Controversy...
Re: [HGML] Idea about command points...
Re: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...
Re: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...
RE: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...
Re: [HGML] Idea about command points...
Re: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...
[HGML] CPs... Are they really necessary?
[HGML] Technicon
[HGML] How do I get off this list?
Re: [HGML] CPs... Are they really necessary?
Re: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...
[HGML] Camille, clarify this for me...
Re: [HGML] CPs... Are they really necessary?
Re: [HGML] HG at Orccon 2001 pt 2
Re: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...
RE: [HGML] Camille, clarify this for me...
Re: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 12:37:16 -0500 (EST)
From: Jason Andresen <jand...@vt.edu>
Subject: Re: [HGML]heavy gear at Orccon 2001 -part 2 (was New Releases for
Heavy Gear)

On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, To Peace wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jason Andresen" <jand...@vt.edu>
> > >
> > > Optional: Cliffs, MAP's, Skirmish scale AOE (>x20 DM weapon has a 5m
> blast
> > > radius, 1 skirmish scale hex.)
> > > House: Modified Iniative (see www.rpghost.com/topeace), ECM rolled as
> dice,
> > > No Compounded Man/Move mods (take the best/worst), Dodge roll not
> required
> > > (to avoid MAPs)
> >
> > Hmm, not combining Man/Move could really hurt those HTs.
>
> not at all. They get the maneuver penalty of minus 2 and the move bonus of
> their high-speed. This rule is designed to help striders from becoming one

Ah, I thought you weren't adding any of them together, so the HTs were
always at -2.

> shot kills and give opponents a chance to kill cheetahs. The striders take
> the worst penalty and ignore the other. The cheetahs take the best bonus
> and ignore the other. If a cheetah is moving slowly it will get its bonus
> for maneuver to end the penalty for speed. This rule had been surprisingly
> effective in our games.

And still the HTs, with good pilots , good FC, and LPAs couldn't touch
them? Someones dice must have been in a bad mood. :)

> the mammoth and the Naga hid behind cover. While the mammoth is slow its
> only dodge was made at a negative two penalty for maneuver, having taken the
> worst of the maneuver and movement penalties.

The cover was actually effecive? I know other other HT battle on this
list, the HTs were ably to blow by static defenses easy due to their
insane top speed.

.-----------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Jason Andresen -- ASCII art fiend -- My opinions are my own. O- |-.
| "I was gratified to be able to answer promptly, and I did. I said I | |
| didn't know." | |
| -- Mark Twain | |
`-----------------------------------------------------------------------' |
`-----------------------------------------------------------------------'

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 09:37:15 -0800 (PST)
From: "Mike, Red 32" <CMike...@excite.com>
Subject: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournament Controversy...

Hey Gang...

Geez... I'm gone for a day and the whole list explodes with controversy!

> > Great to see all the tournements being run. thought I should add
my two cents. The following are my suggestions...
> >

First off, Peace, thanks for the info! It was a good read and it had a lot
of information that will be vital to me when I start working the Heavy Gear
Tournies around here...

But, I thought I'd add my view points to this message as well. Sure, as a
newbie Heavy Gear player, my opinion probably means squat. But, as a guy
whose arguably run more Card Game tournaments than anyone on the planet, I
do have a lot of tournament knowledge to give.

As a tournament director, there are several basic rules that you have to
follow. I tell these rules to all the new TD's that I bring on board with
Star Wars CCG and Young Jedi CCG.

Rule #1: Just don't suck!
There are are a lot of things that you can do that would make you and your
tournament just plain suck. And by doing so, you would involuntarily
alieanate your players.

Rule #2: Keep it simple.
Optional rules, house rules, painting requirements... All this contributes
to the overall complexity of the tournament. They require you as the TD to
make sure everyone knows, in advance, about these requirements.
In Star Wars CCG, adding additional rules and requirements alienates the
players because they're used to playing by the core rules. You'll be
requiring them to retool their thinking... This sucks (see rule #1).
Painting requirements- I love to look at a fully painted army as much as
the next guy. But, requiring it for a tournament adds a level of stress to
the average player. In so doing, this player won't even show up to your
tournament if he isn't ready.
Giving game altering advantages to players who do meet the painting
requirements is unfair to the average John G Player who's just getting into
the game. This sucks (see rule #1).

Sorry, Peace, I'll have to disagree with you on the painting thing.
However, I LOVE your point system for it though. I'll probably use it to
determine prizes for paint jobs and such...

Rule #3: Keep the tournament flowing.
Tournaments can get bogged down when stange ruling have to be investigated
or (in Star Wars CCG's case) tournament administration get's cumbersome.
If the tournament rules are complex, the chances of a tournament getting
bogged down increase (see rule #2).
If players are allowed to bring in their Munchkin, Cheese Boxes, then
checking the math and availability of the hard ware boggs down the
tournament.
And, if players are just standing around wishing they were somewhere else,
that sucks (see rule #1).

In this case, I totally agree with Peace. You might see all this kickass
equipment in the VC's but, trying to figure out which is which on the
miniature battlefield can get confusing.
As a tournament director, I'd have to prefer WYSIWYG.

Rule #4: Everybody gets something.
A lot of players have driven a while to get to your tournament. All of your
players have taken time out of their lives to play in your tournament.
It's a good thing to have all the players walk away from your tournament
with something. Either it be a miniature, or just a poster... Something.
Especially, if they are required to pay an entry fee. If you don't change
an entry, then your wouldn't be obligated to give out very much prizes.

Back to the Painting issue. I think players that really put effort into
fielding a good looking army deserves desent prizes. This effort could also
mean just being able to field an army that's got some color to it... Not
many players out there are advanced minature painters. But, their efforts
deserve some recognition none-the-less.
Anything is better than the primer colored hoards.
Someone had mentioned that the players themselves should decide which army
is the best looking. I totally agree! This gets the players involved and
also inspires the not-so-inclined to put more effort into their work.

Besides all that, the tournament rules you all have been so kind to show me
kind of describe the requirements of the tournament beforehand.
I really wouldn't try to add any further requirements on top of those.

Thanks for reading!

Excellsior!

Mike
The Flight Leader, Red 32
"Meddle not in the affairs of Krayt Dragons, for
you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Visit my website, dammit!
http://cmikehardy.tripod.com/starwarsccg.htm

_______________________________________________________
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 09:43:03 -0800
From: "To Peace" <tokeept...@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HGML] Idea about command points...

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "M Ramirez" <mr...@hotmail.com>
> >leadership, at the beginning of a game with priority points. The leader's
> >skills effect the whole team afterall. Each skill level from the leader's
> >profile costs one point. This cost does not include the bonus levels
>
>
> I don't have my books with me, and I can't remember how one gets priority
> points. But something tells me that priority points can be very cheap -
> please correct me if I'm wrong.

in campaign scenarios each side get five points to spend on scouting,
support, and troops.

> The reason why I say this, is because I have seen CPs used mostly in
> destroying an enemy gear. 1 CP could be worth its weight in 800 or more
TV -
> depending on the type of gear you take out with it.
>
>
> >Since this uses priority points you might consider raising the initial
> >level recieved. Try Patrol =5 or 6, Skirmish=5 to 7, Raid=6 to 8, Minor
> >Battle=7 to 9, and Major Battle=8 or 9
>
>
> This doesn't work so well in a tournament of about 20 people. Each person
> should know their strengths and weaknesses going into the tournament.
After
> all, there will be some pretty decent prizes people will be competing for.
> There will probably be about 150 bucks worth store credit...

Priority Points can be set before hand.

To Peace
Pod Corp Grandfather
www.rpghost.com/topeace

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 09:47:01 -0800
From: "To Peace" <tokeept...@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "M Ramirez" <mr...@hotmail.com>
> I know, I thought the same thing. Once you dip it, you have to let it
drain
> off, and then take a paper towel and soak up the excess. The dip follows
> the contours of the gear, and shades the lower recesses. The high points
> seem to highlight the figure automatically.
>
> Since I started doing this, it takes me about 20 minutes to paint 5 gears!
I
> spend more time gluing them together. I get so many compliments on the way
> they look too!
>
> The store that I frequent - everybody is doing it! They use the dip for
> every fig and every game they play. You'd be amazed at how minis turn out.
> I've seen whole 40k armies, historicals, mecha, tanks, you name it dipped
in
> the stuff!
>
> I'll try to take some pictures of various minis and throw them up on the
web
> for all to see.

I'd love to see them.

To Peace
Pod Corp Grandfather
www.rpghost.com/topeace

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 09:47:15 -0800 (PST)
From: Darwin <ent...@CastleFur.COM>
Subject: Re: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...

On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, M Ramirez wrote:

>
> I've never applied the decals. They're too small, and not worth the effort
> in my opinion. However if you do, the best thing would be to dip the mini
> first. Once dry, spray with a varnish sealer - to take the gloss look from
> the minwax off. Then apply the minis. This is what others have done, and it
> works perfectly.

I'd apply decals to a glossed mini.

paint mini
detail mini
glosscoat mini
add decals
dullcoat mini

the gloss gives a good surface for the decals to adhere to without
silvering, and protects the paint. Then the following dull seals the
decal, and gives the proper military flat to the mini.

Darwin

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 12:50:48 -0500
From: "Camille Klein" <camk...@nortelnetworks.com>
Subject: RE: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0A278.2607BB30
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"

Again, my comments are delimited by asterisks.

- -----Original Message-----
From: To Peace [mailto:tokeept...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 12:14 PM
To: heavygear
Subject: Re: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...

RE: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...
- ----- Original Message -----
[snip Camille waxing rhapsodic about proxies]

you're correct, I'm recommending that a tournament be held with the basic
miniatures with a few exceptions. This keeps the newbies in the game.

*****************************
What we have here is failure to communicate, I think.

Proxying _should_ be allowed in a tournament--that's what my lead-off
comments were about. If I want to use a Death Zephyr (does a sheet even
exist for one of these little buggers? No matter, I'll use it as my example
since I love it so much), I should be able to take a mini that is of similar
size (say, a Cheetah) and say "This red Cheetah mini is impersonating a
Death Zephyr--here's the sheet for the Death Zephyr, and I've already marked
on the sheet that the red Cheetah is proxying this Gear." What's so wrong
about that? So what if there isn't a Death Zephyr mini yet--if enough
people e-mail the Pod People and go up to them at Cons and say "Hey, I've
really been having fun with the Death Zephyr--what are the chances that
there'll be a mini for it? It's so darn cool!" then there's a pretty good
chance that there'll be a Death Zephyr mini coming out sometime in the very
near future.

That said--let me take a slightly different tack and bring up something that
a friend of mine said when we were discussing this very subject.

You're so concerned about "keeping the newbies in the game". But I think
that you fail to take into account that minis and modelling supplies cost
money. Folks watching games aren't going to be so inclined to want to play
if they learn that if they want to play in this interesting-looking
tournament they're watching, they need to abide by such rules as "no
proxies" and "all minis must be painted if you want a chance at winning".
That's going to discourage the average watcher from wanting to play, because
of the time and expense involved (in base minis and parts and supplies so
that they can do conversions) if they want to field Warriors or Warrior
Elites or Kodiak Destroyers or Crossbow Grizzlies or Long Fang Mambas
(Mmmmm..... Long Fang Mambas....) or Blitz Jagers or Snake-Eyes or Gold
Mambas or what have you. Hell, I make $60K/year and my gaming expenditures
are STILL minimal because if I got everything I wanted or needed to play my
favorite games I'd go broke in a huge hurry (and I wouldn't be able to
maintain my car, pay my rent, shell out for 'Canes tix (my only other vice
besides gaming), buy food for my cats, and so on).

D'ya see what I'm saying? If I'm unclear please tell me and I'll be glad to
clarify.
*****************************

- --Camille.

...I realize what I am, what I have become. The alien man waved his arms up
and down and noticed that he couldn't wave in the right language so he
stopped.

- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0A278.2607BB30
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.5.2654.19">
<TITLE>RE: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>

Again, my comments are delimited by asterisks.

-----Original Message-----
 From: To Peace [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:tokeept...@hotmail.com">mailto:tokeepthepeace@hotmail=
.com</A>]
 Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 12:14 PM
 To: heavygear
 Subject: Re: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...

RE: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...
 ----- Original Message -----
 [snip Camille waxing rhapsodic about proxies]

you're correct, I'm recommending that a tournament be =
held with the basic
 miniatures with a few exceptions.  This keeps =
the newbies in the game.

*****************************
 What we have here is failure to communicate, I =
think.

Proxying _should_ be allowed in a tournament--that's =
what my lead-off comments were about. If I want to use a Death Zephyr =
(does a sheet even exist for one of these little buggers?  No =
matter, I'll use it as my example since I love it so much), I should be =
able to take a mini that is of similar size (say, a Cheetah) and say =
"This red Cheetah mini is impersonating a Death Zephyr--here's the =
sheet for the Death Zephyr, and I've already marked on the sheet that =
the red Cheetah is proxying this Gear." What's so wrong about =
that?  So what if there isn't a Death Zephyr mini yet--if enough =
people e-mail the Pod People and go up to them at Cons and say =
"Hey, I've really been having fun with the Death Zephyr--what are =
the chances that there'll be a mini for it?  It's so darn =
cool!" then there's a pretty good chance that there'll be a Death =
Zephyr mini coming out sometime in the very near future.

That said--let me take a slightly different tack and =
bring up something that a friend of mine said when we were discussing =
this very subject.

You're so concerned about "keeping the newbies =
in the game". But I think that you fail to take into account that =
minis and modelling supplies cost money. Folks watching games aren't =
going to be so inclined to want to play if they learn that if they want =
to play in this interesting-looking tournament they're watching, they =
need to abide by such rules as "no proxies" and "all =
minis must be painted if you want a chance at winning". That's =
going to discourage the average watcher from wanting to play, because =
of the time and expense involved (in base minis and parts and supplies =
so that they can do conversions) if they want to field Warriors or =
Warrior Elites or Kodiak Destroyers or Crossbow Grizzlies or Long Fang =
Mambas (Mmmmm..... Long Fang Mambas....) or Blitz Jagers or Snake-Eyes =
or Gold Mambas or what have you.  Hell, I make $60K/year and my =
gaming expenditures are STILL minimal because if I got everything I =
wanted or needed to play my favorite games I'd go broke in a huge hurry =
(and I wouldn't be able to maintain my car, pay my rent, shell out for =
'Canes tix (my only other vice besides gaming), buy food for my cats, =
and so on).

D'ya see what I'm saying?  If I'm unclear please =
tell me and I'll be glad to clarify.
 *****************************

--Camille.

...I realize what I am, what I have become. The alien =
man waved his arms up and down and noticed that he couldn't wave in the =
right language so he stopped.

</BODY>
</HTML>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0A278.2607BB30--

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 17:52:39 -0000
From: "M Ramirez" <mr...@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HGML] Idea about command points...

>in campaign scenarios each side get five points to spend on scouting,
>support, and troops.
>

So what you're saying, is that priority points are given for "free" yet at
the same time those "free" priority points can go towards purchasing the
necessary skills needed to give CPs throughout a game. Thus enabling players
to destroy TV of the opposing side. For "free" right?

CPs are *powerful*. Most people use them for actions. That extra action
tends to be deadly. Especially when said action is used as an interrupt.
Deadly. This is where I've seen people get upset. It's here that I wish to
place some limits. Forcing people to pay for CPs is like purchasing team
re-rolls in Blood Bowl. I like the idea of paying for TCPs, I don't know
what to do about ICPs - short of not ever playing with them again...

>Priority Points can be set before hand.

But then people have to spend time wondering how they are going to spend
those priority points. I like my tournaments to run smoothly, and that means
on my command. They have to, in order to keep the action flowing and people
gaming. Not too mention, it's better from a players stand point, where what
you have on paper is what you have. There's no changing from battle to
battle. Your force is static, done, set in stone for the tournament.

Ramirez

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 17:54:57 -0000
From: "M Ramirez" <mr...@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...

>I'd apply decals to a glossed mini.
>
>paint mini
>detail mini
>glosscoat mini
>add decals
>dullcoat mini
>
>the gloss gives a good surface for the decals to adhere to without
>silvering, and protects the paint. Then the following dull seals the
>decal, and gives the proper military flat to the mini.

Normally this is the case, but nothing sticks too well to the minwax. So
it's best to put something on it first. Like paint, or a varnish.

Ramirez
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 10:02:25 -0800 (PST)
From: "Mike, Red 32" <CMike...@excite.com>
Subject: [HGML] CPs... Are they really necessary?

Hey Team.

Wow... I've never read so much bad press about CPs in the game. Are they
really that bad?

So my questions is, and I'm asking all of your opinions here:

In a tournament, would it be simply easier to just say, "No CPs at all!"?

I'm of two mind of the subject:

1) Pros- CPs are good because they offer tactical advantages to the player
that knows how to use them. Sure, players may Get pissed off when someone
burns 'em down with some well used CPs, but, the way I see it... It's their
own dang fault for getting into that situation in the first place!
It's a learning experience. The better the tactician a player is, the more
destructive his CPs will be.
That's realistic.
Besides, restricting CPs (or limiting them in some way or form) adds an
additional rule that deviates from the core rules and makes the game more
complex (see my tournament rules, Rule #2).

2) Cons- CPs obviously hurt the new player. They also seem to be
dependent on die rolls as well... The better the die roll the more CPs
you'll be getting.
So, great tactical players can have a lousy dice day and get torched by
players that normally would be easy pickings to him.
No one likes a game where somebody get's God dice and virtually runs the
table on them... That sucks (see my tournament rules, Rule #1).

So, when I start doing tournaments, what am I supposed to do about CPs?
Do I let 'em be and let the players fight it out? Or, do I be proactive and
stop CPs all together?

Thanks!

Mike
The Flight Leader, Red 32
"Meddle not in the affairs of Krayt Dragons, for
you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Visit my website, dammit!
http://cmikehardy.tripod.com/starwarsccg.htm

_______________________________________________________
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 13:06:29 -0500 (EST)
From: Jason Andresen <jand...@vt.edu>
Subject: [HGML] Technicon

Is anybody on the list going/running a game at Technicon this year? I
know a couple of years ago the HG game was super popular, although last
year the well organized Battletech players stole the show. :) I'm not
even sure if anybody is going this year, since the planners seem to be
somewhat anti-gaming at that con, even though it's a great place to meet
people on the list and people you havn't seen in a while.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 13:09:05 EST
From: MiCh...@aol.com
Subject: [HGML] How do I get off this list?

- --part1_b7.be12727.27cfea41_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Sorry to bother everyone, but I'd like to unsubscribe from this list, but
can't figure out how. Would anyone be so kind as to tell me?

Thanks

- --part1_b7.be12727.27cfea41_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML>Sorry to bother everyone, but
<I'd like to unsubscribe from this list, but
 can't figure out how. Would anyone be so kind as to tell me?
 
 Thanks</HTML>

- --part1_b7.be12727.27cfea41_boundary--

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 13:21:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Jason Andresen <jand...@vt.edu>
Subject: Re: [HGML] CPs... Are they really necessary?

On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, Mike, Red 32 wrote:

> Hey Team.
>
> Wow... I've never read so much bad press about CPs in the game. Are they
> really that bad?
>
> So my questions is, and I'm asking all of your opinions here:
>
> In a tournament, would it be simply easier to just say, "No CPs at all!"?
>
> I'm of two mind of the subject:
>
> 1) Pros- CPs are good because they offer tactical advantages to the player
> that knows how to use them. Sure, players may Get pissed off when someone
> burns 'em down with some well used CPs, but, the way I see it... It's their
> own dang fault for getting into that situation in the first place!
> It's a learning experience. The better the tactician a player is, the more
> destructive his CPs will be.
> That's realistic.
> Besides, restricting CPs (or limiting them in some way or form) adds an
> additional rule that deviates from the core rules and makes the game more
> complex (see my tournament rules, Rule #2).
>
> 2) Cons- CPs obviously hurt the new player. They also seem to be
> dependent on die rolls as well... The better the die roll the more CPs
> you'll be getting.
> So, great tactical players can have a lousy dice day and get torched by
> players that normally would be easy pickings to him.
> No one likes a game where somebody get's God dice and virtually runs the
> table on them... That sucks (see my tournament rules, Rule #1).
>
> So, when I start doing tournaments, what am I supposed to do about CPs?
> Do I let 'em be and let the players fight it out? Or, do I be proactive and
> stop CPs all together?

Personally, I'd prefer to ditch ICPs entirely (hard to say you're adding
complexity to the game by removing a number to keep track of) and assing
TCPs based on the scenero. The more prepared the side is in the scenero,
the more CPs they start with. If you are playing a pick-up game, roll a
die or two and use that as the number of CPs for BOTH sides (or just do
them normally if you aren't big on balancing forces). Finally, I'd limit
people to a maximum of 2 CPs spent per round (although this does add som
complexity to the game) to prevent the following from happpening:

Last move in the turn:
My Snakeeye is going to go stationary and shoot a target, blow a cp and
shoot another, blow a cp and shoot another, etc...

This rule isn't nearly as necessary if you don't play with ICPs though
(where a single bad roll can doom your entire force). It just ins't fun
when you have already blown your single TCP and your opponent has 4 or 5
TCPs left in addition to the 6 ICPs... Heck it's not even all that fun
on the other side because (at least to me) it feels like your lucky dice
roll won the game, not your superior tactics.

Summary: ICP bad, TCP ok, spending limits iffy, CPs powerful.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 10:28:37 -0800
From: "To Peace" <tokeept...@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...

- ----- Original Message -----
> I agree to a point. For instance a strike Jaguar should be a strike
jaguar,
> however having things such as grenades on it or the VB would not be
> necessary. Besides, with the weapons packs coming out, conversions
> shouldn't be too much of a problem.

Exactly. The grenades aren't a necessity, but would help increase a mini's
"paint rating" for the extra detail added.

> >Multiple Attacker Penalty, an optional rule which helps when Northern
>
> I'm still debating on using MAPs for the tournament. It all depends on
what
> the scenarios are like.
>
> >comms and I've seen this widely accepted; and the modified initiative
turn
> >from my webpage, which helps limit CPs and though a house rule now may be
> >more accepted later.
>
> A little plug for yourself there, huh Peace? :)

sorry, don't think I can say more about it yet. but it's a good rule.

> <whiny 2nd grader voice>
> Just because you said THAT, I'm not going to!
> </whiny 2nd grader voice>

> >3. Support painted minis and fully painted forces. I use an an >
>
> Well I don't think that killing off hunters increases sales. I'm not
really
> one for this type of ruling. I would rather the players utilize their own
> judgement in who needs to get killed first. More often than not, some of
the
> better strategies are getting rid of that nasty Grizzly who keeps pounding
> your forces, rather than the hunter that's not really doing anything
anyway.
> The last thing I want to do, is award players for strategies not
normally
> employed. I want to award for good tactics and accomplishing mission
> objectives.

that's the best one I've seen so far. However the rule generally applies to
vehicles of the same type or similar threat value. Sure you will take out
the grizzly, but if you have a choice between an ugly hunter and a pretty
one guess which one dies? Which doesn't affect the overall tactics.

To Peace
Pod Corp Grandfather
www.rpghost.com/topeace

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 10:31:08 -0800 (PST)
From: "Mike, Red 32" <CMike...@excite.com>
Subject: [HGML] Camille, clarify this for me...

> buy food for my cats, and so on).
>
> D'ya see what I'm saying? If I'm unclear please tell me and I'll be glad
to
> clarify.

So, when you feed your cats, do you utilize proxies as well?
For instance, you point to the red 9-lives and say, "This red 9-lives is
actually impersonating some Tender Vitals."
:D

Sorry, Camille... I just had to get that out of my system.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled argument...

Mike
The Flight Leader, Red 32
"Meddle not in the affairs of Krayt Dragons, for
you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Visit my website, dammit!
http://cmikehardy.tripod.com/starwarsccg.htm

_______________________________________________________
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 18:40:21 -0000
From: "M Ramirez" <mr...@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HGML] CPs... Are they really necessary?

>In a tournament, would it be simply easier to just say, "No CPs at all!"?
>

I don't know either - and I'm an experienced Heavy Gear player. I'm also an
experienced tournament organizer too. I'm struggling with the same dilema :)

>I'm of two mind of the subject:

Two minds are better than one.

>
>1) Pros- CPs are good because they offer tactical advantages to the

<snip>

I agree.

>
>2) Cons- CPs obviously hurt the new player. They also seem to be
>dependent on die rolls as well... The better the die roll the more CPs

That's why I don't like ICPs that much. You could get a lousy roll, and your
opponent could get a great roll, and then all of a sudden - *whamo* - you
could lose the game. On a die roll. If I want to lose a game to a die roll,
I'd play craps.

However I think TCPs are great! The reason, once they are gone, they're
gone. People tend to spend them more carefully for that very same reason.
Plus they help represent the unit's cohesiveness and teamwork in a battle -
I like that.

However free actions which destroy opposing gears should be worth a bit more
than they currently are. For instance, an Elite Pilot in a Hunter costs,
assuming the TV for the Hunter is correct (380*4) 1520 TV. Sorry, but even
in a 4000-5000 TV battle, that's a lot of ICPs you can rack up!! Lots of
ICPs means lots of free actions!! Lots of free actions means lots of dead
enemy gears!! That 1520 TV you spent goes a *long* way!! That's what I
don't like!

Ramirez
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 13:46:03 EST
From: Skyw...@aol.com
Subject: Re: [HGML] HG at Orccon 2001 pt 2

tokeept...@hotmail.com (To Peace) wrote on 3/1/01 at 9:17:30 AM:

> 68' mount LPA's not HPA's. Any ATMs are very effective against
> cheetahs because of burst radius in skirmish scale hexes even
> without the target designators.

Actually, not to nitpick too much but the 68 does have a HPA. It states this
in the BTFG Errata which can be found here:

http://www.dp9.com/Support/FAQS/DP9059errata.txt

> the game was a lot of fun.

Glad to hear. I got the impression from your original post that it was a
cakewalk for the TN forces which is never really fun for either side. I know
it's usually been that way for the HT forces in the games we've played,
though we're using standard rules when we do.

- -sky

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 18:50:50 -0000
From: "M Ramirez" <mr...@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...

>Exactly. The grenades aren't a necessity, but would help increase a mini's
>"paint rating" for the extra detail added.

See, I'm against this. For some people, grenades and VBs make the mini look
cluttered. Other's like the added weapons on the mini. Giving points based
on that isn't a good thing. IMHO.

Granted when conducting the painting competition there are some things that
you want to look for. 1) quality of paint job, 2) basing. Tricked out
conversions and extra detail can sway judges - and it does - however the
system should be set up so that a minimum requirement painted army can still
win.

In your tournaments, one force with a good paint job, basing, and grenades
will beat out another force that has a good paint job, and basing. However
the second one might have an even better looking scheme. So bare minimum
*should* be able to win. This encourages a lot of people to paint their
minis.

Ramirez
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 13:55:49 -0500
From: "Camille Klein" <camk...@nortelnetworks.com>
Subject: RE: [HGML] Camille, clarify this for me...

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0A281.3B1D49F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"

ROFL!

- -----Original Message-----
From: Mike, Red 32 [mailto:CMike...@excite.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 1:31 PM
To: heav...@coffeehaus.com
Subject: [HGML] Camille, clarify this for me...

> buy food for my cats, and so on).
>
> D'ya see what I'm saying? If I'm unclear please tell me and I'll be glad
to
> clarify.

So, when you feed your cats, do you utilize proxies as well?
For instance, you point to the red 9-lives and say, "This red 9-lives is
actually impersonating some Tender Vitals."
:D

Sorry, Camille... I just had to get that out of my system.

************************************
Dayum, I just kinda walked right into that one didn't I?

*rimshot*
***********************************

- --Camille.

- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0A281.3B1D49F0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2654.19">
<TITLE>RE: [HGML] Camille, clarify this for me...</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>

ROFL!

-----Original Message-----
 From: Mike, Red 32 [<A
<HREF="mailto:CMike...@excite.com">mailto:CMike...@excite.com</A>]
 Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 1:31 PM
 To: heav...@coffeehaus.com
 Subject: [HGML] Camille, clarify this for me...

>  buy food for my cats, and so on).
 >  
 >  D'ya see what I'm saying?  If I'm unclear
<please tell me and I'll be glad
 to
 >  clarify.

So, when you feed your cats, do you utilize proxies as
<well?
 For instance, you point to the red 9-lives and say,
<"This red 9-lives is
 actually impersonating some Tender Vitals."
 :D

Sorry, Camille...  I just had to get that out of my
<system.

************************************
 Dayum, I just kinda walked right into that one didn't
<I?

*rimshot*
 ***********************************

--Camille.

</BODY>
</HTML>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0A281.3B1D49F0--

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 11:00:38 -0800
From: "To Peace" <tokeept...@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HGML] Heavy Gear Tournaments...

- ----- Original Message -----
> That could be... The players in your area have been shafted so long by GW
> that they don't even balk when you make the plunk down $100+ for a tiny
> army just so they can play. One thing I noticed about my area is that the
> GW players in general seem to be younger than most other tac players
> (although still older than the CCGers on average). One person said it was
> because with GW it is only a matter of time befor they do something that
> pisses you off entirely and makes you swear off gaming, like changing the
> rules on the army you just spent $500 to make, making them unplayable. I
> know one person who switched to Battletech after that and has never looked
> back.

that's the same reason I was chased away from the games. But I played and
gave up on Battletech when I was 15. I waited a longtime for Heavy Gear.

To Peace
Pod Corp Grandfather
www.rpghost.com/topeace

------------------------------

End of [HGML] heavygear-digest V4 #1001
***************************************

0 new messages