Hi!
>Hi Peter!
>
>I agree that the best course of action would be to leave the Slaan unit
>stats alone, for the time being.
Actually its funny, I had a large hand in helping create and fine tune them,
but yet my only experience is mock battles. While informative i really need
to play against them (or using them) to truly find out what the problems are
(if any).
>Yesterday, I started reading the rules for the Slaan. Comparing the
>action in Nils/Runes battle, with the Slaan units involved.
>The Fluff created for the Slaan is excellent. Hellreich, and Rune (Did
>I forget someone?) should be quite proud of the work they have done.
>All of the units seem to be fairly well ballanced. The army is quite
>well rounded, and has a unit for just about everything. It's weakness
>being the high cost and fewer numbers of troops. The break points are
>about equal to the Eldar.
I heartily agree, lot of work went into them and they look good.
>In reading about the Slaan, I came across the Necron. The Necron units,
>like Wraithguard, have no morale problems. So, they can fight to the
>last stand. They also self repair. The combination of Morale and self
>repair can combine to equal higher numbers of troops.
Agreed. Up to now the necrons are the remaining problem. They are still good
but not as horrendously powerful as they used to be. I still wonder what and
if a change should occur. One thing would be the nullify field. I am slowly
moving to change this somewhat, lowering the benefits, but we'll see.
>This is what concerns me most about these units. Yes, the units ARE
>smaller. But does that REALLY matter?
>
>In reading the battle report, I was alarmed to see that the Roughrider
>Company was decimated, without giving back some of the same to the
>Necrons. That really got me thinking.
Its not so much what they did, but IF they do it everytime, I'm definately
using them next time so I'll tell you how it goes.
>Of course, the next thing I did was to create the vaccum battle
>examples, with units I know well. Although they don't tell the whole
>story that only repeated playtesting can, they do eliminate the
>variables of terrain, luck, playing style, etc...
>
>Such testing can give an indication of problems. In my mock battle, I
>used company sized units. But detachments could just as easily have
>been used.
I love mock battles, sometimes its the only gaming I do, you can derive a
lot of information, but many times it doesn't hold true, its a hit or miss
thing.
>Your point about each army, having it's own bargain units is well taken.
>What can seem to be an overwealming unit, may be necessary to ballance
>the army as a whole.
>
>An example of which is the Wave Serpent. My Ork playing pal used to
>give me a bad time for taking them. He would cry, "They're sooo
>unfair!" After much complaining, I finally suggested that we switch
>armies. He agreed, and we had one of best games I've ever played.
>
>Now mind you, he still complains a little about the Wave Serpents, but
>not as much as he used to. That battle convinced him to build an Eldar
>army of his own.
>
>It helps, to play the other guys army. Things that seemed unfair, seem
>not so unfair, after the table has been reversed. I hope that
>Hellreich, and Runes groups will try passing the command of the Slaan
>around between members, to better playtest it.
Exactly, nothing like a change of perspective, one thing I have learned in
these many years is to play as many armies as I can, then possibly I can
have a unbais opinion. Its easy to gripe about an army you dont use.
>
>In the final analysis, only repeated playtesting will suffice. But
>vaccuum testing can give a valuable, heads up, to possible ballance
>issues. Issues I will key into, when reading battle reports, or playing
>my own battles.
hehe, that simple realization is very clear to those on this list, though GW
seems to never learn it.
Peter
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
Received on Tue Oct 10 2000 - 16:20:20 UTC