>I've seen most
>units have their fluff text reduced (in most cases due to repetition of
>ability explanation) although, IMHO, maybe some fluff seem to be summarized
>a bit too much in one statement.
I tend to cut away what I feel is unnecessary verbage, perhaps (well ok,
apparently) too much so. I'll try (again) to lessen that, and perhaps in a
later version the next editor'll put more fluff back in. Finally, what
happened with the Exarchs is not my fault - that rule was never in version 3
or 4 and I'm not anal enough (quite) to read all the army cards just to see
if there happen to be extra rules there.
-->It's just that I realized that some units had only one line of
description, which seemed a bit telegraphic to me. I suppose it's just
matter of how much fluff is to be added on each unit. As usual this is a
matter of taste and opinion.
>> 2) Is the special rule Defensive Aerial Fire accpetible?
>>
>Yes. But Still needs playtesting.
Should I make it optional?
-->Probably, until we got some feedback on its use. I find it difficult to
assess, since from one side Squat lack AA weapons which in turn is
compensated by massive firing capacity. If this balance is enough to deal
with flyers or not, seems to me a matter of testing
>> 3) Zutiks are soft & flabby? What's the opinion on this rule?
>>
>It is balanced by their cavalry and the fact that it is a fast force.
IMO that should be balanced by other army construction rules. As it is, the
Squats will lose if the opponent sits back and merely contests objectives.
--> Point taken. In the sense that I won't use this clan for a siege,
obviously. But I believe they have resources enough to deal with entrenched
enemies. They still have access to a lot of firepower and useful units. A
combined attack of bikes and gyros. can be really painful if you add the
mechanized infantry, suported by thunderers. And they got the bombers which
advance 30 cm and have melta bombs at -3 TSM (oh, and also are hard-to-hit
skimmers). Not a nice thing to have looking at your back armour. With some
more armour could have even faced Tempests with ease. The combination of
thunderers + bombers can take down titans, praetorians and SH tanks. And you
still can take limited numbers of most praetorians. Their double VP is a
poisoned present for the opponent since the oppomemt that turns too much
attention to them may forget that the strength of this army is speed and
close assault, and find itself entangled in a deep strike of good CC bikes,
good CC infantry (rerolls) and skimmers armed with high TSM (-2,-3). Not a
good horizon, indeed.
>> 4) I combined the Hellworm and the Land Train into one set of rules, as
>> well as a unified list of battlecars. Reactions?
>
>Already commented.
Yes, with the statement that you hadn't read the rules yet. Have you found
the part about open/closed battlecars that you couldn't find earlier?
True. I have read it, and still find it confusing. Since opening and closing
battlecars is only appliable to Hellworm battlecars, I would have this lines
in Hw entry with its battlecars, Land train and its battlecars in another
entry while I would have rules regarding order placing, destroyed battlecars
and tractors together for both units. This way would be less confusing. Now
specific things from one unit are mixed with specific things from the other
unit in the same entry.
>- Commercial world clans cannot ally orks, Chaos and Tyranids.
Why not Chaos? As with the arguement about Eldar and Orks, I can conceive of
situations where a Squat commander is forced to not immediately destroy a
Chaos force, due to the presence of a mutual enemy. Either that or the Squat
commander attempted a "Let's you and him fight - I'll wait over here"
situation and got drawn into the situation anyway. Then there's "I'm running
Chaos Squats - what do you mean I can't ally with Chaos?"
How about the following:
1) Allies: Commercial Worlds may put up to 25% of their points into any one
Standard List other than Orks. In addition they may purchase one Imperial
Guard company (Adeptus Militaris book) with appropriate Support & Special
cards, without it counting as allies.
2) You Owe Us! When defending their home planet, Commercial World Squats may
call allies from any Standard List except Chaos, and can put up to 50% of
the total points into them. These allies will forget any
animosity/incompatibility with other allies present, such is the power of
Squat commercial treaties. Yes, it is possible to field Imperial titans
along Eldar titans and Squat praetorians). Each allied force must be a valid
army (one Company/5 Support, etc.), and are counted as Squat forces for the
purpose of purchasing praetorians (below).
--> Still I wouldn't allow ork allies, for the reasons expressed in the
previous message (plus generational hatred between them). The option of
Chaos Squats seems interesing to me, but it will need more refining, maybe a
codex army for Squats, maybe a codex army for Chaos, I'm not sure. In any
other case, well, it does not sound very fluffy for me (that would mean
those squats had treaties with Chaos, which will turn them into Chaos Squats
anyway), but its a matter of opinion. I think that a Chaos Squat codex army
is due for v5.5 :-D
>I suppose the
>restriction on tyranids has been eliminated given the fact that Tyranids
>ally with noone.
I changed the "any Standard list except Tyranids" to "any standard list"
because I finally realized that Tyranids aren't a standard list.
--> Yip. The first lines of the Tyranid book are quite clear on this. If you
are a 'Nid you eat, if not, you are the lunch.
>- Ram attacks against infantry, cavalry and walkers now ignore fixed saves.
Where did this come from? I don't think it's such a good idea to ignore
fixed saves for the Ram, unless we do it for all tunnelers.
-->I'm sorry, I wrote it too short. Previous version (8A) accounted for
fixed saves. Beta version does not explicit it.
>- Observation baloons have their hard to hit save reduced from -2 to -1.
>Maybe reducing their cost to 75 could balance this.
Forward Observers that can see the entire board on turn one? Four of 'em for
100 points and a Support Card as opposed to one ground-based FO for 100
points? IMO they're just fine.
-->Maybe you are right, I think they could be even raised to special card,
but as always, being a new optional unit, playtesting!
Albert
Received on Sun Apr 17 2005 - 12:04:46 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Tue Oct 22 2019 - 11:00:03 UTC