Hi Nils and Thanx!
>From: nils.saugen_at_...
>Reply-To: netepic_at_egroups.com
>To: netepic_at_egroups.com
>Subject: RE: [NetEpic ML] Veteran HQs
>Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 09:30:30 +0200
>
>Hi Albert
>
>Special regiments are now uploaded to the vault! For Roughrider veterans I
>would suggest attilan roughriders -1 to hit when charging!
>
>Nils
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Albert Farr� Benet [SMTP:cibernyam_at_...]
> > Sent: 17. august 2000 18:22
> > To: netepic_at_egroups.com
> > Subject: RE: [NetEpic ML] Veteran HQs
> >
> > >
> > >On IG and SM Vets:
> > >To design what a IG vet should be like, we can NOT just take the stats
> > from
> > >a SM vet and transfer it. It is a distinct difference between a SM and
>an
> >
> > >IG
> > >soldier. A SM is a geneticaly improved human, if he is wounded he has a
> > >much
> > >better chance of survival and be back in service to the next battle
>than
> > >any
> > >IG soldier. The SM rules even states that a SM is capable of living for
> > >several hundred years unless he is killed in battle.
> > >
> >
> > You are right. A SM may need 50 years to become a veteran, because he
>has
> > battle training and has been growed to fight. The only way to improve
>his
> > stats is through years of fighting. But be aware that he is rising from
>a
> > +2
> > CAF to +4 or even to a terminator armour.
> > The point is that IG tacts have 0 CAF and morale 4. They are not good
> > soldiers, they are only individuals with a lasgun, perhaps they have
>been
> > trained for some time, but it may be that they are absolutely green. I
> > think
> > they would get a veteran status (not a elite one) after three or four
> > battles fighting hard. Of course, there are BIG casualties, but they are
> > cannon fodder.
> >
> > >On this background it is fair to say that for a SM to get veteran
>status
> > >and
> > >be transferred to the 1st company he would have to be in service for
>say
> > 50
> > >to 100 years, either way much longer than a regular IG would survive on
> > the
> > >battlegrounds. This means that to give IG vets both +1 CAF, +1 moral
>and
> >
> > >be
> > >capable of being outside the chain of command is FAR to much.
> > >
> >
> > Well, let me tell you something about history. During Spanish civil war
> > (1936-39) there were very few regular units, the most of them were
>people
> > from the countryside or the suburbs of major cities. After the war, the
> > most
> > of the losing forces (the republican side) were used to use any kind of
> > gun,
> > from any nationality, even the enemy ones. The winning forces (the
>fascist
> >
> > side) also had this characteristic. Some of the winning forces were sent
> > to
> > help Germany on the Russian front. They were called "the blue division".
> > Well, this division fought for some months until the fall of the Reich.
> > They
> > were veterans of Spanish Civil war, most of them had less than two years
> > of
> > fighting experience. BUT they were used as frontline fighters because of
> > their veterany and ability to fight even when isolated from the General
> > HQ.
> >
> > Sorry for this long story, but what I'm trying to say is that veteran
> > companies are not so difficult to find. They appear after some months or
>a
> >
> > couple of years in warzone. The most valuable fact about them is their
> > ability to withstand difficult conditions even when deep into the enemy
> > zone
> > AND their capability to use different weaponary.
> >
> > How would I design them for IG?
> > Well I agree with all who have said that it could lead to cheesy games.
> > But
> > only in part. If I field a lot of veteran Companies, i'll find myself
>with
> >
> > small numbers. And IG are different from SM not for their quality BUT
>for
> > their speed and SM ability to strike surgically deep in the enemy
> > territory.
> > I won't be so stupid to field a IG army that has fewer stands tha ny
> > opponent.
> >
> > So, OK, let it be a Special Card. Let's call it Veteran Honours (it
> > doesn't
> > sound so bad). Let it cost 50% extra to the company cost. It would add
>+1
> > to
> > CAF, +1 to morale rolls and be inmune to the loss of Regimental HQ, but
> > needing the chain of command from his company HQ.
> > Another possibility would be to use the same rules as for bikes and
>Rough
> > Riders
> >
> > So for a tact. company to become veteran it would cost 900 points (more
> > than
> > a SM Battle company). You get 30 stands with CAF +1, morale 3 and
>capable
> > of
> > taking their own decisions if the regimental Leviathan gets fried (all
> > other
> > stats remain the same).
> >
> > >The best thing, I think, is to bury the idea of IG vets, and rather go
> > for
> > >the special regiments Nils suggested some time ago. They are actualle
> > quite
> > >interesting and ads a good amount of flavour to the otherwise somewhat
> > gray
> > >an boring IG inf! That way we also stay more in line with WH 40K.
> >
> > I still haven't seen these regiments, WOULD anyone mind posting them or
> > telling me were I can find them?
> >
> > >(Sorry Albert, just my POW...)
> >
> > Don't apologise, anyone has the right to express his opinion, even if
> > others
> > dislike what he says. Anyway, thank you for your comments, I'm happy to
> > see
> > that people have diferent opinions, and discuss them. This is the way to
> > improve the game.
> > ________________________________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
http://www.hotmail.com
Received on Sun Aug 20 2000 - 18:22:42 UTC