>So, place all skills in the core regardless if they are specific to a race
>or not? That would cut down paper.
Sure, also...some skills might very well apply to other troops, like the
battle sister "urban fighter" skill. THis is a skill which some IG unit
ought to have (perhaps that is an idea for Spec op's..) so putting it in the
sisters army list might be a bad idea....the same goes for other skills
>
>Why not add the break point and victory point values directly to the army
>lists, where unit compositions and point costs are found anyway???
>True. I will do it!
Kewl!
>
>Hehe, I can put inthe following rule, anti-infantry may ONLY penetrate
>armored unit on a roll of 10. Difficult, but possible.
Acceptable. This makes infantry firing at tanks a last ditch effort, but
possible
>I have been testing this, its not as difficult as you think though, it
>requires armor penetration AND a roll for catastrophic damage, granted
>something like a volcano can do it but getting those shields down is
>another probelm too. I once entertained the thought of making the
>catastrophic roll straight up no modifers (only for close combat weapons),
>hows that?
SOunds good. I must admit that I haven't playtested titans yet so you
propably know better.
>We could introduce a continum, the current penalties for one counter and
>the penalties get one more worse and peak at three counters. This sounds
>like a good idea.
Yeah, fine. It makes suppression a bit more tactical and gives the orks a
little more strength
>
>Can units suppress a single target unit by directing really massive
>firepower towards it???
>What do you mean? Multiple units CAN shoot at it for suppression, but the
>firepower of each group is independently determined.
If my unit got 16 firepower could I suppress your unit of 3 tanks more than
once?
>
>Space marine army list:
>Why do flamer marines get rhinos when the rest doesn't? I can't imagine
>that
>the small portion of flamer marines in a chapter could possibly steal the
>rhino's from the rest of the chapters forces.....
>Can you say "typo". I took all the transports off to give people
>flexibility to have them on foot or mechanized.
>
OKay..:) But it does make the marines a bit awkward because it is difficult
to mechanize an entire company. But I like the ability to have marines on
foot. Of course you could just buy a dedicated transport company with
raiders and rhinos and use it to transport the company
>Imperial guard army list:
>Heavy infantry should really only have an assault rating of 2....I know I
>have bothered you with this before but if quality arguments don't help,
>then
>try with quantity :)
>This was the original thought, but game mechanics wise its not a good idea,
>think about it a 2 assault means you die in assault on any roll but a 1, if
>we add modifiers it can make auto-kills, which I dont want. Note the
>highest modifier is +2 but that takes a lot of difference in assault
>strength. Its to give them a fighting chance.
Hmm, fair enough. I surrender ;)
>Note that knights are bought as individual models, due to cost and power, I
>think tis appropriate to have them as heros, since frequently they may lead
>lesser troops.
Okay. You may be right.
>Eldar army list:
>
>Dark reapers definately shouldn't have so much armour! They are also
>overpowered in NetEpic which is ridiculous. In 40K they have armour like
>striking scorpions, so why the hefty armour plating (walking tanks
>actually)
>in Heresy? I advice reducing this to 5 or at the very most 6.
>The original background has been diluted considerable, in the original list
>they had a "carapace" armor which is very powerful. They were made with
>this in mind.
>
Hmmm, okay. But 7 is still a lot I think
>Aren't the warp spiders death web a bit too wild? In 40K it was always an
>anti-personal weapon. Why do this weapon have both range AND a template?
><shrugs shoulders> I dont know much about these nwer units os its hard to
>get them right, whats your suggestion.
>
Penetration 2, anti-infantry. Their chances of shredding vehicles are VERY
slim. In the third edition of 40K they can't hurt tanks unless getting them
from the rear.
>Make ork nobz! Simply make them replace the boyz that accompany ork
>leaders.
>Keep the current stats (Except perhaps a +1 bonus to assault) but make
>their
>weapons all-purpose (blastas) instead of anti-infantry. Simple and
>characterfull.
>Nobz are there, I just call them warband leaders
>
okay. This makes the number of nobz in an army considerably less than
NetEpic. BUt anyway, I always saw the NetEpic orks using nobz as the actual
fighting force, and the boyz to add numbers.
>Hope you can use this salvo of stuff...and if anyone else has comments
>please bring 'em on
>Cool! I just love how these rules get better and better. I have been
>playing some games and pitted a Imperator versus a Lizardking titan to
>dispel any doubts on Slann titan viability, more on that this weekend.
Okay. I must agree that it is intriguing to see the rules evolve and reach
higher and better levels all the time. Kinda exhilirating.
______________________________________________________
Received on Tue Mar 07 2000 - 15:35:02 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Tue Oct 22 2019 - 10:58:53 UTC