Hi!
Very good points. Although I am of two minds with this issue. I slightly
tend towards combining them. Those who field tech-guard can use them as is
anyway regardless if they are a separate list of not. Nothing really
changes. The stats are the same, the organization remains the same. It just
takes up less space.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: jyrki.saari_at_... <jyrki.saari@...>
To: netepic_at_egroups.com <netepic_at_egroups.com>
Date: Thursday, May 25, 2000 3:22 AM
Subject: RE: [NetEpic ML] RE: [Net Epic ML] IG/TG/SoB and all things Imper
ial
>[snip]
>
>Now my 2FIM:
>
>1) The IG and TG. In this I support the combination of the lists. The TG is
>not that unique; it didn't even exist before the TL and hasn't been heard
>from since. In the original fluff there was no "machine god" (yechh! I
relly
>hate that apparition), the titan legions were not part of Adeptus
Mechanicus
>but formed their own branch of Imperial armed forces: The Collegia
Titanica,
>of which the battle titans formed the part called Divisio Militaris. When
>titans needed infantry, IG regiments were seconded to them (the Scutarii
>regiments). The Knights were not really part of army, but a culture similar
>(somewhat) to Eldar Exodites. The knight worlds were seconded to a forge
>world: they supplied food for the FW and the FW supplied spare parts and
>machines for the KWs.
>
>2) Imperial "allies". The problem is that this can be viewed from two
>different perspectives: army command and game. No army commander would be
>stupid enough to use special forces alone in a frontal assault without
>support from the rest of the army. In the game POV, however, the situation
>is a bit different: it can lead to cheese mongering and min/maxing in the
>worst sense, so limiting "allies" is understandable. Unfortunately not a
>simple situation.
>
>Jyrki Saari
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Old school buds here:
>http://click.egroups.com/1/4057/5/_/7255/_/959242965/
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
>
Received on Thu May 25 2000 - 14:18:23 UTC