Re: [NetEpic ML] Re: the wimpy rad bomb

From: warprat <warprat_at_...>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 00:53:07 -0700

Hi Steven,


Thanks for your great response!


To me, Epic battles ARE fought like that. The banners, the WWI and
ancient mentality, etc... The pictures are accurate. It's just hard
for us to imagine being that way.

The Warhammer universe is not our destiny. We try to expain Warhammer
units and tactics in terms of what we understand. Mainly WWI, WWII, and
modern. But Warhammer is a twisted universe. It may have human life in
it, space ships, tanks and stuff, but the attitudes and philosophies
are very, very, different than our own.

When was the last time you ever saw a banner on a modern war machine?
Warhammer battles are Warhammer battles. They are not of OUR universe.
The tactics and units, only make sense in a Warhammer context. If I want
gun ports, sane tactics and units, I'll play something else.

A large part of the fun, for me, is trying to put myself into the
Warhammer spirit, when I'm playing the game. I like the giant moving
castles, that spit death and destruction. I like the insane carnage and
pageantry that IS a Warhammer battle. Playing, lets me forget my world,
and imagine another.


Warprat ;)




Steven wrote:

> Warprat,
>
> The pictures are just pictures. An artists rendition of what our
> battles may look like. All very cool looking, too.
>
> No one would fight like that. Didn't we change the Capitol Imperialis
> from just having the troops on the top able to fire, to "Multiple
> firing ports are scattered though out the Capitol's broadside
> permitting infantry to fire from these positions. Up to all infantry
> stands that compose the company may fire from either side of the
> Capitol Imperialis for a total of 2 companies that may fire in
> addition to the Praetorians guns. A maximum of one company can shoot
> from any one side." This makes more sense than troops hiding behind
> archaic, crenellated battlements. Why did we do that to the CI? What
> modifiers do they get?
>
> I'd bet, if there were a picture drawn of the CI in the thick of it,
> it would have troops raining down a hail of death from the
> battlements up top. Not "multiple firing ports".
>
> It sure is nice to think of the battles looking like the pictures,
> and to me they do, but those troops we can see aren't the troops that
> count. They are part of the Titans CAF and other defenses. The troops
> it's transporting are safe inside.
>
> SNEW
>
> --- In netepic_at_egroups.com, warprat <warprat_at_j...> wrote:
> > Boys, your killing me!
> >
> >
> > Can we, please, just solve the problem with troops being able to
> attack
> > without retaliation. IE: The Imperitor, the Capitol Imperialis.
> Are
> > there others?
> >
> > Did ANYONE read my fine note about the battlements NOT being gun
> ports?
> > Does ANYBODY even care?
> >
> > Could someone, anyone, please explain how the pictures in the books,
> > justify a 4+ save for fortifications?
> >
> > Thankyou, ANYONE, for a reponse on these issues!
> >
> >
> > Warprat ;)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Peter Ramos wrote:
> > >
> >
> > >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > Yup, fort rules dont need to apply, that would make the couple of
> guys
> > > in the bastion unhitable.
> > >
> > > Agreed.
> > >
> > > Peter
> > >
> > >
> > > OK peter
> > >
> > > the rad bomb, and flamer weapons and there are 4
> > > stands that are hitable with the bastions 3+ 2D6
> > > armor save is that right leave the forts rules out
> > > of it
> > >
> > > this works for me i ve no problem with this
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
Received on Mon Sep 18 2000 - 07:53:07 UTC