Hi!
Thats a good thought, reduce it to 6cm which is coherency range.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: hellreich_at_... <hellreich@...>
To: netepic_at_egroups.com <netepic_at_egroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, April 25, 2000 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] How to beat the Slann?
>Yes but lets try to decrease the Null field to 5cm instead of 15cm, the
>Slann foot troops will not beniffitfrom there ablity so much this way. Thus
>Slann troops will be some what weaker also.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Peter Ramos <pramos2_at_...>
>To: <netepic_at_egroups.com>
>Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2000 12:34 PM
>Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] How to beat the Slann?
>
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> Agree. If they are thought too strong, we can bump up the price, which is
>> the easiest and fairest thing to do. I think my initial cost range for
>them
>> was quite high, but perhaps that is the way to go. I'd say a bump up of
>> about 50 for most support units and 100-150 for Necron companies and
>knights
>> will do the trick. After all they are supposed to be a relatively
>high-tech
>> small army.
>>
>> Of course we need to know from those who have played them the most. It
>seems
>> that a price increase may be in order.
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>
>> >>Another good idea is for YOU to play another army and have your
opponent
>> >>play the slann. If you still beat him its a matter of tactics, if he
>beats
>> >>you easily then its a matter of the rules.
>> >
>> >
>> >hellreich has a 14 out of 20 rate and Karlsen has 4 out of 4. This is
>> >indeed a good indication of Slann success. Can anymore people out there
>> add
>> >to these stats? I am inclined to agree with Peter when he called for
>those
>> >play testing to try to use your opponent's army. This would be the best
>> for
>> >the playtesting. Can anyone do this? I am not saying that your
>opponents
>> >are unworthy BTW. I want this army to be fair. Play testing this way
>will
>> >also give your enemies better insight into your army.
>> >
>> >I am however pretty much opposed to changing the stats of the army. We
>> >built this army with the motto: if it is powerful and you want it -
have
>> >it - just pay the points. If the Slann are too powerful then we should
>> >increase the point cost. Reworking the stats would mean redoing the
>whole
>> >army - and that as we all know is a BIG job.
>> >
>> >>I'd say the nuero disruptor ignores cover modifiers. As for th Necrons
>> self
>> >>repair, I am inclined to say it does not work after CC, but I would ike
>to
>> >>hear other poeples take on this.
>> >
>> >
>> >I would also think that removing the self repair when in CC would make
>the
>> >Necrons weaker. If they are over powering (this seems like it is the
>> case),
>> >then remove this power in CC and continue play testing. Leaving the
>> Necrons
>> >off the table is not an option.
>> >
>> >Teras
>> >
>> >
>> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >Good friends, school spirit, hair-dos you'd like to forget.
>> >Classmates.com has them all. And with 4.4 million alumni already
>> >registered, there's a good chance you'll find your friends here:
>> >http://click.egroups.com/1/2885/3/_/7255/_/956677737/
>> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> You have a voice mail message waiting for you at iHello.com:
>> http://click.egroups.com/1/3555/3/_/7255/_/956680842/
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>
>_____________________________________________
>NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
>Click here for FREE Internet Access and Email
>http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>High rates giving you headaches? The 0% APR Introductory Rate from
>Capital One. 9.9% Fixed thereafter!
>http://click.egroups.com/1/3010/3/_/7255/_/956691628/
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
Received on Tue Apr 25 2000 - 20:24:09 UTC