--- In netepic_at_yahoogroups.com, "ramospeter" <primarch_at_c...> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > +AC+ Still the free cards? Why not finally write some _real_
rules
> to
> > characterise craftworlds and get rid of these?
>
> I wouldn't mind, I hate free cards anyway. Anyone got any
> suggestions? You have some stuff written up?
+AC+ Yes... my Eldar codex it's already in the files section (too
long to post it there)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/netepic/files/Non-image%20folder/New%
20units%20and%20rules/AntiChrist%27s%20ideas/
> > +AC+ I'll give that a +4 CAF instead of +2 and at least 2
Shuriken
> > Catapults (25cm, 2, 5+, 0) mounted in the arms (to match the real
> > model)
>
> Are they really that good in close combat? They weapons upgrade I
> think would be fine.
+AC+ Yep, it's a monster in close combat (at least in 40k with its
two power fists)
card cost should be 200 points per 4 dreadnoughts (or Wraithlords, I
prefer this name)
> > +AC+ These should be Infantry, not walker (they are five a base)
> so
> > they can be transported. Why the 6+ fixed save? They are tough as
> > Space Marines so go with a 5+ save. They are not so strong in
> close
> > combat (+2 CAF is better IMHO), but theyr Wraithcannon is deadly:
> I
> > suggest to change the stats to (35cm, 1, 4+, -2).
>
> I agree they should be classed as infantry. I dont know why they
> have a fixed save, perhaps its a hold over from earlier versions.
>
> The weapons should be deadlier, but I'll see what other opinions
> sprout up.
+AC+ With this configuration they should cost 150 per 4 stands
Received on Wed Jul 23 2003 - 22:27:04 UTC