Re: [NetEpic ML] Few questions about V5 squat Army Book
Since the Behemoth is a Praetorian, it would make since to me that
it has Point Defense and is always on First Fire orders, like other
Praetorians.
Tim
a.k.a Dwarf Supreme
--- In netepic_at_yahoogroups.com, Peter Ramos <primarch@...> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Sorry for not answer your questions on epicomms, its been hectic
for me
> lately.
>
> vince_epic wrote:
>
> >Hi all,
> >
> >First I'd like to say a very big thank for all the work on
Netepic V5
> >rules and armies book, it's a real pleasure to read and play
with :)
> >
> >As I read the V5 Squat Army Book Final, I noticed several points
that
> >need few explanations for me:
> >
> >- Cyclops DoomStorm Missile are listed with a varying To-Hit-Roll
is
> >it normal ? I thought that those missiles barrage templates
should be
> >put touching each other without adding BP if a template is over
> >another (even if I don't if putting 2 templates on the same
location
> >is authorized)
> >
> >
> You are correct. They are independent missiles that need to be
place
> touching each other (no overlapping) and dont add BP.
>
> >- Behemoth is a praetorian but it has no PD and is not always on
First
> >Fire Order, so is it considered has a standard unit for orders
> >purposes or is it played for orders like cyclops or Colossus ?
What
> >about the PD ?
> >
> >
> This is a good question. I think this is a hold over from the old
rules.
> For uniformity it should be treated as all other praetorians.
>
> Anyone else have an opinion on this?
>
> >- Still for the behemoth, the railgun is mounted on a turret, does
> >this gun has a 360° arc or fire or limited to 180° front ?
> >
> >
> Yes, turret mounted, 360.
>
> >About the 450 points cost, it costs the same than cyclops, but
Cyclops
> >seems to be better than Behemot (missiles, better FA, 1 more
shield,
> >lots of PD but 5cm less movement) even if I respect the power of
the
> >railguns ;)
> >
> >
> In playtest it is as effective. Try it out and let me know what
you think.
>
> Peter
>
> >Vincent
> >
> >
>
Received on Tue Feb 14 2006 - 14:35:03 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Tue Oct 22 2019 - 11:00:04 UTC