That proposed defensive rating make more sense to me, as it is true in real life. Greg.
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 14:47:30 -0700 From: steve...@gmail.com To: rctankcombat@googlegroups.com Subject: [TANKS] Another Rule Change Proposal The defensive rating as defined by the rule set is biased against sloped armored vehicles. It is my proposal to adjust the rules as follows to recognize the defensive benefits of sloped armor. Current: Defensive Rating Each asset will be given a defensive rating based on the maximum frontal armor carried by the asset. The defensive rating determines the number of hits needed to destroy the asset, using the following table: Proposed: Defensive Rating Each asset will be given a defensive rating based on the maximum frontal armor carried by the asset as measured in the horizontal plane. Assets classified as a tank destroyer will have one point deducted from its defensive rating to compensate for the generally weaker side and rear armor that these assets where historically equipped with. The defensive rating determines the number of hits needed to destroy the asset, using the following table: Steve Tyng -- You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group. To post a message, send email to rctankcombat@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe, send email to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat -- You are currently subscribed to the "R/C Tank Combat" group. To post a message, send email to rctankcombat@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe, send email to rctankcombat+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com Visit the group at http://groups.google.com/group/rctankcombat
