posted 02-23-99 12:30 PM ET        

Have you ever thought of how illogical it is that armor constitute a good defensive value?
I mean, I find it hard to believe that a 1-4 unit can defeat a 4-1 only if on defence, and a 4-1 unit on defence is terrible. Actually I could go for that for example a missile attack unit isn't all that good in defending a town but... a guy defending with a pistol can't have too much fun, no matter how armored, against a guy with a missile rifle right?

A units weapon strenght really should be both offence and defence value and armor should contribute to hit points - instead of reactor...why is reactor hit points anyway,
I could go for if it helped units get more movement points and/or better attack strenght, but hit points....