RE: [NetEpic ML] [v5.0] Core Rules [LONG]

From: Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 21:02:31 -0400

Hi!

>Yeah, its a nice rule. But...the army lists need to clearly show which
>units are covered by this rule. So it is all clear and ovbious,
>particularly to players who arent all familiar with 40K

Good point.

>A very good idea. Something to elevate the types of games and battles
that
>can be played

Any ideas?

>I think we may need to cut down on the number of HQ units. Perhaps make
a
>difference between HQ and "Hero" (or something similar)

Problem is wouldn't the problems of one be transferred to the other?

>I would like transport vehicles to calcaulate their movement in a
simpler
>and faster way when troops embark / disembark. The way it works in E40K
is
>simple and efficient. Both the infantry and the vehicle spend 5 cm of
their
>movement for each embark / disembark

We used this in Heresy, it works pretty good. What do other people say?

>I think giving seperate orders to 3 rhinos is a little over the top but
it
>may bethe only way to work it.

Why three, if one detachment is mounted then only ONE extra order.


>Give this a standardized title "Robotic targeting" or similar. And then
add
>this in the army list rather than describing it for each unit. That
way, we
>also avoid rules contradictions. The description of robotic targeting
would
>then be clarified in the core rules. Same goes for Infiltration,
snipers,
>stealth and other abilities common to several units.

Agreed.

Peter
Received on Sat Apr 13 2002 - 01:02:31 UTC