Re: [NetEpic ML] Cost questions

From: Peter Ramos <primarch_at_...>
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 17:44:07 -0400

Hi!

yar_underwood wrote:

>I apologize for the previous poll - I was about to put up a series of
>polls about unit costs, and realized I really should post something
>first to see if it's worthwhile. I've found a number of the Eldar
>units are over or under-priced. I was wondering if other folks have
>found the same.
>
>Cobra: List cost 250, but the main gun always scatters and the
>secondaries aren't that impressive. I suggest dropping the cost to
>200, or increasing the secondary weapons (now 2 dice at range 25) to
>three dice and 50 cm. The To-Hit would remain at 5+, 0 TSM.
>
200 points sounds about right. We'll see what people think.

>Wave Serpent: Perhaps the most massively useful APC in the game,
>IMHO. I propose raising the cost to 200 points.
>
There is always a debate that armies should get some good units at low
cost. If this is the only unit like this I'd keep it at that price.

>Vibro-Cannon: Currently the TSM is 0 if one hits you, -2 if two and -
>2 for three. I'd like to improve the seige capabilities by saying
>it's always -3 for buildings. Peter's suggestion (I think it was his)
>of making the titan Tremor Cannon be -6 TSM against buildings would
>also follow along with this.
>
I'd definately increase the siege capabilities of the weapon, its pretty
unattractive as it is.

>Other Eldar questions:
>In 40k, is there a difference between a Scout, a Ranger and a
>Pathfinder? I'd like to name the basic scout one thing, and the
>Alaitoc scouts something else. Currently they're Pathfinders and
>Alaitoc Rangers. Is this generally acceptable?
>
I think its all the same thing, but we'll see what others think.

>Why did the Deathstalker name get changed to Fire Prism? Was that a
>GW thing?
>
GW thing. I prefer the old name.

Peter
Received on Mon Oct 06 2003 - 21:44:07 UTC