Re: Kel's take on Chaos

From: Luca Lettieri <magnus_at_...>
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 09:22:17 -0000

--- In netepic_at_egroups.com, Kelvin <kx.henderson_at_q...> wrote:
> With all the talk about what to do on the Chaos lists for NetEpic
floating
> about, I thought I'd chip in my take on how to deal with the Chaos
of it
> all (boom, boom).
>
> The way I see it, I think Chaos should be divided into three lists:

I like the general idea. I just want to add a remark: let's be very
careful about "total army capability".
There's been a discussion about the particular traitor legion which
should have defensive capabilities. However, I didn't see anyone
worrying about the fact that, by adding that particular legion to a
generic chaos army, you've just given chaos an ability which it
didn't previously have - a good defense.

So if we want to add neat special units etc. we need to keep an eye
on the overall picture. The three different lists is a good idea -
provided we keep them sufficiently separated.

One more warning though: if we go the "add everything" route, the
various armies will lose their character. Chaos is noted for all-out
attack - if we do three lists, it's more than likely than at least
one of those won't resemble the normal chaos we're used to.
Everything will turn similar to imperial armies - they'll have
everything, just split up in different branches.


Luca Lettieri
Received on Mon Sep 04 2000 - 09:22:17 UTC