[NetEpic ML] Re: Thoughts on Chaos

From: AntiChrist <seimejote_at_...>
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 02:05:47 -0000

--- In netepic_at_y..., deaconblue3_at_j... wrote:
> BTW... still here: GW says "A"? You do "A". If I want the
possibility
> to do "B", the army list should give me the option.
>
> -->Why should you have option "B?" If you're playing WW2 Brits,
should
> you be able to field a TigerII company? Or should the Japs be able
to
> field a division of Stalin tanks? Just because you want to? It's a
> flawed design concept for a genre, and universe specific system.
If you
> want that sort of willy nilly freedom with your armies, play E40K or
> DSII, they fit that bill nicely. and I never said anything about
> adhering to whatever the latest and greatest GW fluff is (ie
> nonexistant). Like the eastern Orthodox Church, I froze canon with
> 40Kv2. Anything beyond that is useles rehashes of fluff retconned
into
> giving their current model range legitimacy. I much prefer the
darker,
> more sinister RT era fluff.
> Josh R
>
> "No matter where you go, there you are." B.Bonzai

A full CSM Company instead of CSM pawns of Chaos daemons is rather
different from German tanks in a British army, IMNSHO. And for
whatever reason 40kv2 background should be preferred to 40kv3 one?
Received on Sat Nov 23 2002 - 02:05:47 UTC