Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus
I've often thought that an ARV of some sort would make for a really interesting PC vehicle, but my current campaign hasn't provided too many opportunities for my players to encounter one.
|
Which is okay with me. We're in a different situation there, and moving off the
Queen would fundamentally change that game's flavor. Also, we don't really have the skill set to take full advantage of one.
Quote:
|
At the same time, it's not going to give the group an overwhelming advantage over enemy forces, and the party is going to have to worry about fuel and maintenance. It's sort of a "tweener" vehicle- better than nothing but not as formidable as an Abrams or a Bradley or something along those lines. This, to me, would be more interesting to play with than an MBT or IFV.
|
That's a lot of my thinking, yeah. The limitations of the platform would keep the group from getting too aggressive, and they'd still have all the logistical headaches associated with a big thirsty tank engine. At the same time, it's more practical outside a fight than an M113A3 ACCV or the equivalent - which is really what we're talking about when we look at its combat capability.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcdusk
Combat Engineer vehicles or extending through to cranes for example, should give PCs more ability to "rebuild" the world (ie fixing things). So i think these vehicles could re-focus the game away from combat and more into "moving forward".
Defending such a vehicle, or whatever project it was working on (such as a bridge or armour shop), should open up enough possibilities for action. Or sourcing building materials from nearby (or not so near by!) should provide little story arcs to base around PCs using CEVs.
|
And that's the other half of their appeal for me. I like stories about putting (a little piece of) the world back together.
- C.