Heresy II: some more input

From: Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 19:04:20 -0400

Hi!

After some more testing last weekend I realize that the rules work fine,
but the army structure, to put it mildly, SUCKS! The actual battlegroup
mechanic is good. It reduces the amount of command units on the board
and at the same time it gives them true command and control.

Therefore I must put some more thought in the organization of each army.
Part of the problem, I think, was to try too much out of the leadership
characteristic. I wanted command radius and battelgroup control to stem
from it. While that's fine it restricts me too much and perhaps has kept
me from finding a good solution.

My general thoughts on army organization are:

Space marine/ Eldar- I would like relatively small groups, enough so
that with the SM/Eldar superior morale a typical leader could activate
most battelgroups in one turn. Thus taken piecemeal they would be in
trouble, but they are good enough to coordinate attacks eefectively.

IG/Orks/PDF- these would be the opposite of Eldar/SM. They would control
few, but large battlegroups. On average they would activate one or two
battlegroups so they coordinate very well. However they can resist more
damage.

Chaos- would be a meld of the above two, depending on what part of the
army we are talking about.

Tyranid- would be more like orks, although their high morale would make
it a deadly swarm.

Squats- in between SM and IG.

Slann- Necron would be like tyranids due to morale and the exodites are
more like Squats. True slann would be slightly better then SM.


For those who tried it out, any comments welcome.

Peter
Received on Tue Jun 04 2002 - 23:04:20 UTC