Re: [NetEpic ML] More brainstorming

From: dkaardal <dkaardal_at_...>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 13:02:49 -0000

> The morale idea is a good one and has been mentioned once or twice
over
> the years. Problem is it only benefits armies like the SM and
penalizes
> IG, orks and Eldar. So basically instead of using a for-sure-tactic
> against titans with all armies you get to do it with only a few. SM
> players might be thrilled (as well as chaos and tyranids who pretty
much
> ignore morale), but other not as much. Any rule implemented should
be
> even handed for all armies.

Errr... then get rid of moral entirely, since tyranids don['t have to
roll for it...

Seriously, yes it's better for space marines and tyranids - but then
again, so are other things. "eden handed rules" are not part of the
epic universe... every race has it's bonuses and drawbacks.

> I don't mind losing a titan to infantry, what I mind is losing it
to the
> SAME tactic game after game with little you can do against the ploy.
> I've been playing the game intensely for years, trust me, before the
> changes the ploy was commonplace, to the point where titans had
> disappeared from the game. Compared to AT (first edition) SM/TL
titans
> are wimps. We just want to redress the balance some.

I've lost maybe one or two titans to this tactic over the years(once
I stopped leaving my titans out in the open, that is) - and believe
me, it's tried every game at some point. I make sure I've got anti-
infantry weapons, and a screen of friendly infantry - sure it takes
some planning, but so does fighting any battle. between my infantry
and my gatling blasters, even tyranids can't get close enough to
bring down my titans. Well, it's a LITTLE harder with warhounds...

To me, making a rule to prevent the use of a tactic that can only be
used if the titan player isnt paying attention doesnt make sense.
THAT is cheezy.

hell, I've been playing against tyranids lately - should I get rid of
the regeneration rules because they make me loose my ARMY every game?
Nah, I'm just going to work around it an come up with better tactics.

I realise that I'm in the minority here, but I reall don't see a
problem with the original rules. You loose the occasional titan,
sure... but only if you make a mistake - like any other unit.

I guess it depends completely on how you view titans. If you think
that they should be unstoppable war machines that cost you very few
points, then make them immune to infantry... however, you may want to
think about this:

Reaver titan: Point cost, roughly 500 points (that's what they were
in the original rules, and same with netepic with modest weapon load)

Shadowsword tank company: Point cost, 500

Why should the titan be immune to infantry when the exact same point
value of superheavies is NOT? I mean, the tanks are slower, have no
void shields, and don't have hit locations... so it's FAR easier to
destroy them even with direct fire... but they cost the same. The
titan has roughly the samed amount of firepower as 3 shadowswords
(depending on the load-out for the reaver) - but the reaver will
never worry about infantry. Even tyranid infantry, for the most part.

by making titans immune to infantry you make them immune to 1/2 of
the enemy army, usually. This CANNOT be free. you're doubling the
value of the unit, and not charging anyone extra points for it.

I think the main problem is that people LIKE titans... so it really
bothers them when they seem fragile, or vunerable to certain tactics.
I think that the rules should decide wether or not titans are merely
cool looking and useful war machines, or giant war gods. if it's the
latter, make them cost a LOT more.

ack. Sorry to get off on a rant - It's just one of the main rules
issues that I've got for netepic.

:)
Received on Thu Mar 28 2002 - 13:02:49 UTC