Re[2]: [NetEpic ML] Re: Core rules Deep Reading (long)

From: christian danckworth <ce.de_at_...>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 03:48:05 +0100

Hello Peter,

Thursday, March 20, 2003, 3:09:31 AM, you wrote:




PR> Battle groups, of any types have in one way or another, ticked off most
PR> of the net epic veterans due to the fact that in the original GW rules
PR> you got 3 titans for the price of two. The only drawback being a unit
PR> coherency of 25cm. This of course was/is unacceptable. Unfortunately no
PR> one in the past has come up with a reasonable solution.

hi,

we have no problem at all in our gaming group with the battlegroup
rule.
you have a lot of firepower, no doubt, but you have to spend many
points nevertheless.
and when fighting with much terrain on the battlefield you can have
strategic problems with a "battlegroup-investment" in such a game
(LOS , etc.) i.e. you could regognise that you invested the wrong point
values into the wrong units...

i often play mobile armies with not many titans because my experience
is to win more battles with them (even against armies with
battlegroups in it)

on the other hand i hope that the battlegroup rule stays as i think it is
very usefull for larger games with many titans in it !

in generell we handle it in every game that balanced armies fight
against each other (we do not allow one side for example to have ten flyers while
the other only has one AA unit).
it's all a question of communication between the players and thousands of rulechanges
are not necessary in my opinion.


again : just my opinion...;)

c-ya

christian








-- 
christian danckworth
miniature-design
http://www.fantastictool.net
fantastictool
p.o box 55 02 03
10372 berlin
Received on Thu Mar 20 2003 - 02:48:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 10:59:53 UTC