Hi All!
These ideas seem good to me.
Warprat ;)
Peter Ramos wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> > I think this is fair enough and these units I would not mind seeing in the
> Core
> > Squat rules. Short-ranged battle tanks with the fire-support given by the
> > Praetorians is a great idea. It also fits with the idea that the Squats'
> tanks
> > would be needed to be used in their tunnels and so the shorter range there
> is
> > ideal.
>
> This was my idea, they would make nice core unit and they seem to be in
> character at least.
>
> > > Chaos
> > >
> > > The main points will probably be primarch cost and teh re-evaluation of
> some
> > > powers. I would agree that primarchs should have a higher cost, but some
> of
> > > them (slaneesh) should have their powers raised accordingly.
> >
> >
> > Yep. The Slanaeeshi Daemons get screwed royally. But as for the
> Primarchs,
> > they should definately be upped in cost. You see these guys everywhere.
>
> I'd probably let it control one unit or detachment within its range (no
> morale roll required), of course shielded units and titans/praetorians
> regardless of shield status would be immune.
>
> > > The usual issues of what they can and can not use as marine or IG
> equipment
> > > can be addressed
> >
> >
> > I think they should be able to get this kind of gear but in limited
> numbers.
> > Marine and IG gear should be restricted by having Renegade Marines and
> Cultist
> > in your army. Otherwise, who is it who brings the gear? Plus restricting
> such
> > units to being "Special Minion Cards" (ie- only one "Special" Minion card
> per
> > Daemon) will go a long way to reducing their abuse.
>
> I like this idea, actually to support those who hate t-haws for chaos this
> rule would limit them much.
>
> > > Two additional points will be if slannesh titans will have void shields
> or
> > > another idea posted where their aura made that the titan could only be
> hit on
> > > a 5+ regardlesss of the to hit of the weapon
> >
> >
> > I think the 5+ fixed to-hit will make them much more attractive.
>
> I agree. I favor this one too.
>
> > > The second issue being the havoc missile rack and its low power to cost
> > > ratio.
>
> > I think a simple reduction in cost would be fine for it.
>
> That may be enough, but the fact that it takes two weapon hard points. I'd
> rather have a powerful expensive weapon to make it worht taking.
>
> > > Tyranids
> > >
> > > The only and most poignant issue is the "regenerate card", which in my
> view
> > > and most who have voiced it should NOT be used for titan.praetorian
> classed
> > > units which have many benefits anyway.
> >
> >
> > Perhaps to limit its abuse, we could simply limit the Regen Card to a D3+2
> roll
> > for the number of wounds you get back? I don't mind people playing this
> on the
> > Dom, but I admit that with Titans it gets a bit old. By restricting the
> number
> > of wounds you get back, you can still thump that Dom or Giant Roach with
> 20+
> > wounds and then you KNOW it ain't gonna get up no more.
>
> I make it simpler and give multi-wound creatures a d6 wounds gained with
> this card, then anyone can use it.
>
> > Back to the Mega-WasteOfPoints, your suggestion of 75cm Gun Decks and an
> > increase in points to 1500 would be just about right as an improvement,
> Peter.
> > I think it would then make a fine addition to the ranks of Ork Idols.
>
> Most definately. It just doesn't pay to take this without that range on the
> gun decks. With this range it is worthy of its points value and certainly
> worthy of consideration for Ork player. A clear superior to the Great
> gargant.
>
> Peter
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Enter to WIN one of 10 NEW Kenmore Ranges!
> Only at sears.com
> http://click.egroups.com/1/2677/3/_/7255/_/955415672/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tue Apr 11 2000 - 05:15:17 UTC