Re: Tyranids vs Squats

From: ramospeter <primarch_at_...>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 15:58:57 -0000

--- In netepic_at_yahoogroups.com, Stephane Montabert <kotrin_at_y...>
wrote:
> Hi, I have both tyranids and squats as well, and I
> completely agree with Albert.
>
> Basically, I find that the squat victory point rule is
> stupid. Squat units are harder to break, okay, but
> they give more victory point !
> This defeats the whole purpose of the "harder to
> break" rule.
>
> A 150 pts squat unit should gives 2 VP, no more, when
> it reaches its break point (which is further than half
> the models) and, for tyranids, another 2 VP when wiped
> out.
>
> This would really make the squat infantry suitably
> hard, and fair against Tyranids.
>
> Happy Gaming
>
> Kotrin

Hi!

But would it be fair to other armies? If you keep the same break
point but do not reward the greater effort in reaching it, you give
more advatages to the squats and more handicaps to the rest of the
armies.

I must emphasize that after many, many games between the two, I just
dont see any "unfairness" in the rules as they are. I think its more
an issue of the player and his relative experience with one army and
another than the rule itself. That's why I recommend playing this
combination more and see if the observation pans out. A rule canot
be evaluated in isolation, but as it interacts with all other rules
in a real game. I have proposed a lot of rules, units and changes in
the past only to find out they were seriously flawed.

So go have fun and playtest!

Peter
Received on Thu Nov 27 2003 - 15:58:57 UTC