Re: [NetEpic ML] [v5.0] Blood Angels proposal; forgot something

From: Albert Farr� Benet <cibernyam_at_...>
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 14:06:20 +0200

->A 10cm increase in move on charge orders with 1 in 6 chance of breaking down is hardly a "super" anything.

May be it doesn't seem so "super" but then you have 60 cm charging Rhinos, 70 cm charging bikes & speeders it's quite a lot and this is an invitation to also give this ability to an Eldar craftworld or a Squat brotherhood or... The result is that in the end this is just improving stats continously until reaching the point of unstability. Do you really think that BA units are too slow? I don't think so. IMHO the revision purpose is not focused in improving unit stats but rather in balancing the game and improving the mechanics. We should upgrade the stats of unbalanced units and let fluff reasons improvements be the exception. Fluff should guide the army strategy prior to rule changes. If following the fluff strategy is difficult or not possible at all then it's time to correct stats.

I want to state that IMHO SM army (any chapter) is one of the best ones (not to say the best) in NE 4.1. And Yar's revision of unit costs point in that direction. Just look how many SM units appear undervalued by his criteria. A while ago I remember a poll on which armies where the most used, and I don't remember SM geting a bad position.

I repeat, if we improve even more the SM there is a real danger in stability. They are faster enough (some would say more than enough) at the moment.

->Yet it is being done all the time. The Marines don't exactly revere Machine God, you know.

They do (change designs) to a point. But in (GW) standardised way. Notice how the improvements in 40k vehicles were normally available to all marine (or imperial) vehicles. I don't know the politic in this matter for the last two years, but anyway, lately I just don't care about last mods from GW.

In the other hand marines don't revere the Machine God, OK but I think TechMarines have a lot of respect for the AM as they use almost everything from them. Even SW which differ a lot from the codex or DA change troop organization or tactics but the vehicles are almost untouched

->Blood Angels aren't exactly rational in this sense. They want to get up close and personal.

They still are marines, they still serve the emperor, their love for their battle comrades is still exceptional, they still must observe orders and they sitll MUST OBSERVE UNIT COHERENCY. There's more than a 50% chance that a unit of bikes with overcharged engines get at least one stopped and the whole unit must wait for him. This is not a good marine tactic. Never.

-> That is _exactly_ the Imperial approach. To modify existing designs rather than to make completely new ones, that is.

Yip, but as standard variation and in large scale. Look at Chimera Variants, they are allowed to all IG regiments, or Rhino variants are also widespread. If they had so good engines why they were not used by othwers chapters or tanks of the imperium.

-> Blood Angels reliable? We are not talking about hyper-disciplined units like Dark Angels and Imperial Fists but a bunch of semi-savages who become bloodthirsty psychopaths in battle. Besides, there's no such thing as totally reliable troops. And even if there were, they wouldn't be called Blood Angels.

BA may be bloodthirsty psychopaths but never semi-savages or undisciplined troops. Remember that the most crazed ones go to the death company, the others might be more or less psycopathic but always psycopathic marines.

Again it's true, there are no absolutely reliable troops, and this is factored in the randomness of some aspects of the game (shooting, CC, rallying, Initiative) but for the rest, their actions should be decided by the player unless special conditions (Avatar, madboyz, out of command, broken,...). The role of ALL SM is that of disciplinate troops used in battle mainly in surgical attacks which require a lot of coordination, reliability and flexibility. If BA where the so much undisciplined troops you refer they would have not reach the 40k millenium.

-> What is E:A? Like I said before, IMO it is easier not to use something which exists rather than use something which doesn't exist. For example, I don't like the 4.1 aircraft rules so I don't use them even though they were voted core rules.

I was referring that improving stats as general method of revision (the so called GW way) will scarcely lead to any good. OK, I see your point, if I don't like I don't use it. But I think that if this tread is going to lead to a point to the game being unplayable, and the most of the players ignoring it, why continue working for this result? I don't want to spent a lot of hours to do sthing I know no one would use. I prefer thinking about it and correcting it before it's too late and a lot of effort is wasted.

Albert
Received on Fri Jun 14 2002 - 12:06:20 UTC