Re: [NetEpic ML] Iron Warrior votes (LONG)

From: warprat <warprat_at_...>
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 20:58:07 -0700

Hi Weasel!


First, I have a couple of comments about the role of the Iron Warriors.

1) Marines are a rapid deployment force, they get there fast to
establish a beachhead, establish a defensive position, or
exploit a weakness in an enemy defense.

Iron Warriors, in keeping with the Chaos offensive nature, would be used
to exploit a weakness in a defensive position. Since Iron Warriors are
assault specialists, they would be sent to destroy fortresses and other
strong defensive positions.

2) Marine equipment is of a lighter, less varied nature. This enables
fast movement, and reduces supply nightmares.

3) Marines, the men, are the strength of any marine force, not the
equipment. Iron Warrior tactics should reflect this.

4) Iron Warrior equipment should support the tactics, thus enhancing the
marines.

Warprat ;)





Weasel Fierce wrote:

> I glad for all the feedback my post on Iron Warriors have caused.
>
> I think we are ready to do a little voting here. Please everybody with the
> slightest interest give me your votes on each of the following things and
> then we can pick uot those things we do not want and those that the majority
> think are cool.
>
> Feel free to suggest more.
>
> here goes:
>
> Iron Warrior special ability: (Pick one or more))
> A: All stands start in foxholes (as trenches but each segment covers only
> one stand)
> B: Stands are dug in automatically when assuming first fire orders
> C: Each Iron Warrior company get a free trench card
> D: Each Iron warrior company get a free razorwire card
> E: C and D
> F: Iron Warriors get a +1 assault bonus when assaulting buildigns, trenches
> etc.
> G: As F but increased to +2 for veterans
> H: Iron Warriors can ignore razorwire when moving
> I: Iron Warriors get an assault bonus near objectives (15 cm. or so)
>

F, H


> Terminators:
> A: Terminators are designed for close assault in dense terrain and should be
> available
> B: Termi-armor is too heavy and would bog down / slow down an assault. Thus
> not used by Iron Warriors
>

A



> Heavy weapon infantry: (Please make notes of availability too (company,
> support or?))
> A: Regular (Not veteran) Warrior stands have range of 75 cm. (keep other
> stats as normal)
> B: New unit (Havocs?) with stats equivalent to marine devastators
> C: No heavy wepaon infantry
>

C



> Dreadnoughts: (Pick as many as you like)
> A: Iron Warriors may buy marine dreadnoughts
> B: Improve existing chaos dreadnought
> C: Iron Warriors may buy dreadnought-only companies
> D: Iron Warrior infantry companies include a dreadnought detachment
> E: Each company get a dreadnought detachment as a free card
>

A


> Field artillery:
> A: Should Iron Warriors have access to heavy artillery like the imperial
> bombard? If so, should this be self-propelled or a slow field gun?
> B: All Iron Warrior artillery starts the game dug-in ??
>

No


> Tanks and other units: (Please make any relevant statements about
> availability, modifications etc.)
> Rhino
> Predator
> Land raider
> Vindicator

All this is standard.


> Thunderhawk gunship

Only as a Special card.


> Bikes

Standard again


> Gorgon type vehicle for mine clearance

No, leave this to the IG.


> Land raider modified for trench crossing
> Predator with flamers instead of lascannon

OK, as Special Cards.


> Sabre
> Flamer infantry

OK, The Flamers would work well.


> Chaos recruits
> Veterans
> Scouts (marine style)

Are these on the new list?


> Assault engineers (for clearing wire, mines etc.)

These would be OK.


> Drop pods
> AA guns??
>
No!


> What should lead a company? My suggestion is a chaos champion which we
> already have stats for.
>
Yes, of course.


> Should Iron Warriors be allowed to take generic minion cards as well?
> (cultists, beastmen etc.)
>

Generic


> Should they be allowed to pick specific minion cards too (propably a maximum
> of one card) or only generic??
>

Generic
Received on Tue Sep 05 2000 - 03:58:07 UTC