Message-Id: <199809281601.LAA17971@smtp2.mailsrvcs.net>
From: "Carlos" <Preserve@gte.net>
To: <babylon5-wars@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>
Subject: [B5W] EA vs Centauri battle Report. . .
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 10:37:02 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-babylon5-wars@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: babylon5-wars@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU

> Yes, I very much agree. I just am worried about the reaction of my local
> Centauri players when I tell them that is what is being done. Right now,
> half of our 8 regular players play Centauri.

Last night we played with most of the new rules propositions.  
	-2/hex, 2 intercept Twins
	-1/hex SPBs
	+1 per damage criticals 
	New pulse recharge
	+6 initiative categories
	d10 fighter dropout
	Higher Heavy Weapon damage. . .

EA:  3 Omegas, 18 Starfuries, 12 Thunderbolts
Centauri:  Octurian, 2 Darkner, 2 Maximus, 3 Haven, 18 Sentries

Twins still ruled the game.  Battle Lasers (Darkners rule!) can hit before
Heavy lasers.  Now that they do more damage (2d10 + 22) it is really
significant.  3 Omegas stuck together to protect themselves with
overlapping SPB fire.  If they were -2/hex the Omegas would need to remain
in the same hex to protect each other.  

I felt the +6 initiative was cool.  I can live with it.  The only problem
was Havens and Maximus were beating the Starfuries 1/3 of the time. . .and
SLAUGHTERING them.

Final Tally:  2 dead Omegas, 12 dead Thunderbolts, 10 dead Starfuries
	No dead Centauri Ships (1 haven with no engine), 12 dead Sentries  

To my opponant's credit, it was the third game he had ever played.  

					-Carlos


-- End --