Re: [NetEpic ML] Eldar and Orks

From: Kelvin <kx.henderson_at_...>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 09:13:19 +1000

At 06:11 PM 4/9/00 -0500, Peter wrote:
Hi!
>
>Hmmm... I see what you mean, it does say that. Geez, these really brings a
>big interpretaion question. In truth until you pointed it out I have never
>seen it played in those terms or interpreted that way. The "nearest enemy"
>usually being interrpreted as a "general" guideline.

Well, it does actually say Nearest Enemy and we played that it would charge
the nearest enemy within reason. If the nearest enemy was outside the
charge arc (ie- the 90 degree turn it can make) then you charged the next
nearest target that it could actually charge. If this was infantry, then
so be it.

>Very interesting, its not everyday I get surprised by an epic rule or
>interpretation. Goes to show if you stick around long enough you WILL see
>everything. We'll Kelvin you win the coveted "you stumped the coordinator"
>award. This one is a doosie!

Aww shucks <blush>.

>Of course the question is now, if this is a good thing or a bad one. I can
>see if the choices were between two units of its same class (like titans) it
>would be the closest, but making it run around with infantry stands is
>rediculous! Or is it?

I really don't find it so ridiculous. Imagine this:

"Okay ladz, dis is it! CHAAARRRRGGE!"
"Er, charge wot Boss?"
"Wot is dere?"
"Dere's dat big 'Oomie God-fing over dere or sum squishy 'Oomies just down
'ere."
"'Oo's closa?"
"Da squishy 'Oomies, Boss."
"Squish da 'Oomies den! We can take care of da big 'Oomie God-fing later!
WAAAAAAGGGGHHH!"

Orks may come up with grand plans and strategies but in the heat of battle
I can see them becoming easily distracted, especially when they are
thumping around in a big tin can. But if people wnated to limit the
"nearest" to say, Superheavies or bigger, then I suppose that would be
reasonable.


-Kelvin....

============================================
         "Of course I'm paranoid!
       Everyone's trying to kill me."
============================================
Received on Mon Apr 10 2000 - 23:13:19 UTC