Re: Re: archery

From: philip.hibbs_at_...
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:25:05 +0100

>Don't forget that much of the time it is impossible to close with
>the archers -- I'm talking about the case of mounted archers like
>Grazers or Praxians. These guys already have a huge advantage, and
>I see no reason in the game to give them further benefits like edges.

In an instance like this, the horse archer attacks with their "horse archery" ability, and the footman defends with "close combat" -5 or whatever. The footman, if they are trying to close, attacks with "run", the horseman defends with "ride horse", possibly augmented by horse's "run" ability.

Why would you give horse archers a lower edge for their arrows than foot archers? Or, to put it another way, I don't see that horse archers are a good arguement against increasing the edge of an arrow. I've never played a horse archer, and would be annoyed if the inherent advantages that horsemen have was used as an arguement to keep down the effectiveness of my arrows.

Philip Hibbs http://www.snark.freeserve.co.uk/ Opinions expressed may not even be my own, let alone those of any organisations, nations, species, or schools of thought to which I may be affiliated.

Powered by hypermail