|
|
Post by gdieckhaus on Nov 7, 2016 18:31:59 GMT
I find it odd that weapons are either in range or not. Has anyone ever thought about having a Short/Medium/Long range for weapons.
At Short range, weapons get a +1 to hit, long range a -1 ?
Or some sort of modifiers based on rage?
Gregg
|
|
|
|
Post by David N.Tanner 07011959 on Nov 7, 2016 19:09:40 GMT
I like the simplicity of either in range or not in range. I think short, medium and long range is fine for skirmish rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by madmorgan on Nov 7, 2016 19:55:51 GMT
Your point is well taken. Like so many other things, AQ shorted a lot of what most of us take for granted in miniature gaming. No ground or time scale is listed; no range break down as you suggest; most game functions are relatively simple. In all, it was made with a firm tongue in cheek approach, considering that we're talking about Martian Tripods and machines stalking a WW1 period USA. I find it refreshing and have noted only one major change to the general rules - that of determining the Break Point differently. I've tried my hand at adding Ships and Aircraft to the game. And including the rest of the world with new armies and battlegrounds. But, at its basic, AQMF works well enough on its on and we're lucky to have it being picked up by IG - support them, they are doing all of us a great service.
|
|
|
|
Post by tenchuu on Nov 8, 2016 15:52:41 GMT
Range rules, if not weapon specific, don't affect much to realism. If they are per weapon, they add a lot of complexity. AQ has a real advantage of speed of game; it's something Mantic has picked up as well. Rules that don't need to be looked up make for better, faster games.
|
|
