I was just putting some ideas out there. So leave the Gravs at 1000pts, the
extra 100pts we could test, Spwans I'd still like to see them CC at 1100pts.
As for the Necrons we could test with the no save just 5+ repair. I'd really
like to do this, for the vehicels would be stronger then troops, plus the
Slann and Necron troop saves would be equal, this would be the reason to
take the Necron protector to boost your save to 6+ and then a repair, see my
point. Now like this the Protector becomes a needed card for the Necrons. We
could price them the same as Exodus Troops, but I'd think just a tad higher
for the ablity to take the Protector, giving the Slann much needed numbers.
How this sound? What would be your idea to make the Foot troops weaker then
tanks? This is what I'm triing to fix. For IMO Cyber troops would be weaker
then a Cyber tank, no?
----- Original Message -----
From: Karlsen Rune <rune.karlsen_at_...>
To: <netepic_at_egroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2000 2:41 AM
Subject: RE: [NetEpic ML] SoB more than meets the eye?
> I agree about the Slann CC's, allthough i think 1000 points is
> enough
> for the Gravguards. They didn't really impress me that much.
> Wehn it comes to the Necrons, i disagree. They are
> pretty much balanced as they are now (I think they're somewhat
> overpriced
> though) and if you remove the fixed save, they're just
> more cannonfodder, not the specialized troops they're supposed to
> be.
> There are Dracons for cannon fodder. Also, they have battlesuits.
> Besides, 50/25 points lower for the removal of the fixed saves is
ludicrous.
>
> It might be cost formula correct, but it's not in RL.
> 1/3rd less chance for
> survival equals what? A cost reduction of 1/20th of the
> cheapest CC
> card cost? Get real :-) I hope you're not setting the price
> by feel,
> then using the cost formula to take away points as you
> reduce the Necrons...
>
> Just my 2 Nkr...
>
> Rune
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: hellreich [mailto:hellreich_at_...]
> Sent: 2000-05-29 17:36
> To: netepic_at_egroups.com
> Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] SoB more than meets the
> eye?
>
> great great, so we have come to a agreement, on the army.
> Now just needs
> fine tuning, I'd still like to see the Gravguards cost
> 1100pts for company
> cards. Spawnguards I'd like to leave as 3 detachments at
> 1100pts weaker
> troops, plus would when feilded, make the Slanns more in
> number then the
> Necron foot troops. As I see it each army should have 1 CC
> at some what low
> cost, This is the one for True Slann. How dose All feel
> about taking the
> fixed save from the Necron foot troops, just let them have a
> repair roll of
> 5+, only let the tanks have the 2 roll one for save and one
> for repair, this
> would show that the tanks have more armor then foot troops.
> In my eys we
> could then lower the cost of Necron foot troop cards Company
> by I'd say 50
> pts and support by 25pts. How dose this look? !!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Karlsen Rune <rune.karlsen_at_...>
> To: <netepic_at_egroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, May 29, 2000 3:15 AM
> Subject: RE: [NetEpic ML] SoB more than meets the eye?
>
>
> > You forgot to mention that i tried out the 1000 point
> Gravguard
> > company as well. I'll have to say, and i think Nils agrees
> with
> > me, that it didn't make much difference in this battle.
> > I think the Gravguard and the Spawnguards both could be
> > 2 detachments without any modifications beyond reducing
> > the cost by one third.
> >
> > I was very impressed by the SOB, and also by how much more
> > balanced the Slann seemed now. I fielded the best i had,
> but
> > it was still balanced. I lucked out on initiative, winning
> all 3
> > times,
> > and contribute my victory to that fact alone...The ignore
> cover
> > to hit weaponry of the SOB really makes the difference
> against
> > an army like the Slann which have lots of units with fixed
> saves.
> >
> > My battleplan was to hang back with the gravguards, mechs
> and
> > tanks, while the Necrons and the Vanguards took out
> strategic
> > enemy positions and held VP's to the front. This worked
> out OK,
> > but showed the Slann's biggest weakness, namely numbers.
> > I simply didn't have enough units to try and take and hold
> all
> > the VP's. On my right flank, i had the Nemesis' and the
> Gravguard.
> > The Gravguard held a VP, and the enemy held a VP with his
> > Archangels in a woods nearby. I had to keep a detach of
> > Necrons nearby in case the Archangels charged (with a
> > devastating 50cm move!). I couldn't move away, because
> > i didn't have the move to reach the Archangels in one
> turn,
> > and i couldn't hit them since they were in the woods.
> > If Nils feels he did badly with the Archangels, this is
> only
> > because he didn't attack when he had the chance! As a
> > deterrent, they did an excellent job, and Nils wants to
> take
> > 2 detachments of these next time. I don't blame him. 50cms
> > move on charge and flightpacks makes these a Slann
> > Mech killer! :-)
> >
> > Rune
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: NN [mailto:nils.saugen_at_...]
> > Sent: 2000-05-29 08:55
> > To: netepic_at_egroups.com
> > Subject: [NetEpic ML] SoB more than meets the eye?
> >
> > This Saturday Rune and I played a 5000 points game between
> > the SoB
> > and the Slann, The SoB fielded a Sister Company, an
> > Immolator
> > Company, a Rhino Company, a Retributor company and a
> > Punisher
> > company. They where supported by 2 Predator and 1
> Vindicator
> >
> > detachment, 2 detachments of Cardinals, one detachment of
> > Archangels,
> > a Justifier special card, a Cleric, a fwd. Observer, and a
> > pair of
> > Warhounds. The Slann had a Gravguard company and a Necron
> > raider
> > company, supported by 2 Bullfrog detachments, a Nemesis
> > detachment
> > and finally two Vanguard special cards.
> >
> > The battlefield was dominated by a ruined town and a
> couple
> > of woods.
> > Lots of cover! The Sisters won the roll for setup, and
> chose
> > the side
> > with the most cover. The plan was to catch as many VPs as
> > possible in
> > the first turn and to defend them and keeping a mobile
> > reserve to
> > stop any Slann breakthroughs. The Cardinals and the
> > Retributors would
> > hang back giving fire support. The Titans had one role,
> suck
> > up fire
> > in the first turn! If they survived, that would be
> > excellent, but I
> > didn't plan for that to happen!
> >
> > The game lasted for three turns, and was a very close
> race.
> > After the
> > first turn, the score was 25 - 21 in favour of the SoB,
> the
> > second 41
> > - 37 to the Slann, and the game ended in the third turn 55
> -
> > 37 to
> > the Slann. We had equal luck with the dies, except that
> the
> > Slann won
> > the initiative in every turn. If the SoB had got the
> > initiative in
> > the third turn, things might have looked different. Most
> > went
> > according to my plan, but I chickened out with the
> > Archangels and the
> > Justifiers, so they didn't see any action at all. I lost
> > because
> > the
> > Slann where able to break all most all of my detachments,
> > while
> > keeping the Bullfrogs and Gravguards more or less out of
> > harms way.
> >
> > The SoB worked just fine on their own. I take my hat off
> to
> > Jyrki for
> > putting together a well balanced army. It appears light on
> > paper, but
> > looks can be deceiving. I'm working on a couple of units
> > that
> > I'll
> > add to this army in due time, and I'm definitely keeping
> the
> > sisters
> > as a standalone army!
> >
> > What about the Slann then? They have made progression.
> They
> > now seem
> > more balanced, but are still a very hard to beat. Each
> unit,
> > although
> > small, packs a lot of punch and resilience, making them
> very
> > hard to
> > kill. Slow moving opponents might find it difficult to
> beat
> > them,
> > because they stop you dead in your tracks by the end of
> the
> > first
> > turn. I think you need to try to catch as many VP's as
> > possible
> > in
> > the first turn! Concentrate the fire and break one unit
> > after
> > another! They are very few and not that mobile, so they
> will
> > have
> > trouble covering the entire battlefield. Use that to your
> > advantage,
> > and you may be able to beat them.
> >
> > Nils
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Missing old school friends? Find them here:
> > http://click.egroups.com/1/4055/5/_/7255/_/959583411/
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > To unsubscribe send e-mail to:
> > netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Old school buds here:
> > http://click.egroups.com/1/4057/5/_/7255/_/959584557/
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > To unsubscribe send e-mail to:
> netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
> >
> >
>
> _____________________________________________
> NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
> Click here for FREE Internet Access and Email
> http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
>
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to:
> netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Old school buds here:
> http://click.egroups.com/1/4057/5/_/7255/_/959668913/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
>
_____________________________________________
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Click here for FREE Internet Access and Email
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
Received on Tue May 30 2000 - 14:31:19 UTC