That is with the multipple barage warhead which would have been my 2nd
option.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nils.saugen_at_... [SMTP:nils.saugen@...]
> Sent: 11. oktober 2000 15:54
> To: netepic_at_egroups.com
> Subject: RE: [NetEpic ML] Slann victorious again.
>
> Voops,
>
> Should have checked the rules before playing......
>
> Longe time since i fielded IG......., well that would make the result
> somewhat different, but not certainly changed it much. Of course we have
> made houses veritable fortresses with our houserules so, the necron
> detachment in the building would have survived I guess.... Statistically I
> should have taken out 2 of the necrons in that building. As for the
> Gravguards, it would have ment that I could have hit all 5 of them
> statistically i would have destroyed 3 of them, the same amount as for the
> Vortex missile.
>
> Nils
>
> Nils
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Eivind Borgeteien [SMTP:eivind.borgeteien_at_...]
> > Sent: 11. oktober 2000 15:39
> > To: netepic_at_egroups.com
> > Subject: [NetEpic ML] Slann victorious again.
> >
> > Hi!
> > I read through some rules today and came across a somewhat disturbing
> > thing in the regard of the battlereport by Nils. Nils fielded a
> > Deathstrike Missille Launchers armed with VORTEX MISSILES. This is
> > not allowed. The allowed missiles are barrage missile, harpoon
> > missile and warp missiles. (This is not all Nils fault, as it where I
> > who actually suggested it, not knowing the rules)
> >
> > This weapon took out a nemesis MBT, a detachment of gravguards and
> > some vnguard. No other weapon worth 250 points could have done so
> > much damage, so we have to consider this battle as a clear victory
> > for the Slann. This leaves me with the feeling that we still have
> > much to do regarding Slann...
> >
> > Eivind
> >
> > --- In netepic_at_egroups.com, Karlsen Rune <rune.karlsen_at_e...> wrote:
> > > Hear,hear! Feedback from one who has actually fought the Slann! :)
> > > I agree completely. When your opponents takes flyers, you plan for
> > > that. When your opponent takes Warp missiles, you have to be careful
> > > with your tactic. When your opponent takes along a titan, you take
> > > along some titankiller units. Necrons are no different. Take along
> > > lots of cheap infantry and support them with units on FF or AF.
> > >
> > >
> > > Rune
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: nils.saugen_at_s... [mailto:nils.saugen_at_s...]
> > > Sent: 11. oktober 2000 09:36
> > > To: netepic_at_egroups.com
> > > Subject: RE: [NetEpic ML] RE: [Net Epic ML] Slann victorious again?
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I don't think the Necron Assault ability to warpjump is to
> > powerfull, in
> > > fact i think it is a great unit. As Rune has pointed out there is a
> > chance
> > > that the Necron will get lost in the warp and scatter 3d6 cm, which
> > is quite
> > > a lot. In a detachment of 5 stands if more than one of your troops
> > should
> > > deviate and pop out somwhere betveen 3 and 18 cm away from the rest
> > of the
> > > unit, you could find your self cut off and destroyed. Secondly the
> > stats of
> > > the Necron Assaults may seem horrendous on paper and they perform
> > pretty
> > > well. You have to outnumber them 3 to 1 in order to secure a
> > victory. In
> > > retrospect of our last game I should have taken 2 roughrider
> > companies, the
> > > beastmen almost didn't see any action due to their low speed. In
> > this battle
> > > I made one of my flanks to weak (just one detachment of
> > roughriders, with no
> > > sentinels to support them!) and suffered from that, on the other
> > flank the
> > > battle was evenly fought, and the beastmen would have made pancakes
> > of the
> > > remainin necrons on that flank in the following turn.
> > >
> > > My point is, even though the Assault Necrons is a very powerfull
> > unit they
> > > will breake very easily (8 stands). You would need to outnumber
> > them 2 or 3
> > > to 1 in order to secure sucsess, but you know that and can plan for
> > it!
> > > Always use supporting fire from advancing units to mop up the
> > survivng
> > > Necrons from the CC. But the one thing we shouldn't do, is to make
> > the
> > > Necrons thouger to breake! This is their great weeknes, and IMH the
> > sole
> > > reason for the unit not beeing overly cheesy!!! Sure its a
> > powerfull unit
> > > indeed, but that makes them all that more challenging to fight
> > against. Let
> > > them have a go at a couple of detachmends of striking
> > scorpions........ I
> > > think the scorpions will take them out! We often forget that each
> > and every
> > > army has got very powerfull units/weapons. IG has Warp/Vortex
> > Missiles,
> > > Ordinarius vehicles, and the artillery (In the early days my
> > opponent often
> > > complained that the artillery was waaaaay to powerfull), somebody
> > thinks
> > > that IG and SM combinations are cheesy although they are clearly
> > ment to be
> > > combined in all official material from GW. The Squat Colossus is
> > relatively
> > > cheap and increadbly powerfull, Wave serpents, pulse lasers, Nova
> > cannon,
> > > the list goes on and on. But you know how they work so you can plan
> > on how
> > > to meet them, and IMO thats the thrill of the game.
> > >
> > > For all of you who are interested in the Slann, try them out for a
> > couple of
> > > games before passing judgement. If you still think the army is to
> > powerfull,
> > > then suggest the changes you think will improve the Slann/Necrons,
> > and we
> > > will discuss them in this forum!
> > >
> > > Nils
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: warprat [SMTP:warprat_at_j...]
> > > > Sent: 11. oktober 2000 02:46
> > > > To: netepic_at_egroups.com
> > > > Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] RE: [Net Epic ML] Slann victorious
> > again?
> > > >
> > > > Hi Peter!
> > > >
> > > > I was thought about this, when reading the Slaan rules. Perhaps
> > limit
> > > > the normal jump of Necrons to 20cm. Any further jumps would have
> > to use
> > > > the Swallowed/Scattered table.
> > > >
> > > > Your idea about the Scarabs is good. Integrate them into the
> > Necron
> > > > units. Either keep the stats and cost the same, or boost the
> > Necron
> > > > ability to Nulify at range as the Scarab does, AND boost the
> > price up.
> > > >
> > > > I would like to hear what Hellreich and Rune would say about this,
> > > > however.
> > > >
> > > > Warprat ;)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Peter Ramos wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi!
> > > > >
> > > > > I have come to the conclusion that the scarab cards may be
> > overkill,
> > > > perhaps
> > > > > just say they ARE part of Necron units keep stats as is and
> > eliminate
> > > > the
> > > > > scarab card. This way Necron assault are tough since they have
> > scarabs
> > > > doing
> > > > > all this to the enemy.
> > > > >
> > > > > As for warp jump, Eldar warp spiders have this why shouldn't
> > Necron who
> > > > are
> > > > > technologically superior? of course I'd add one thing, the
> > danger of
> > > > being
> > > > > lost into the warp like all slann units that have this, the
> > good goes
> > > > with
> > > > > the bad. how does that sound?
> > > > >
> > > > > Peter
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: warprat [mailto:warprat_at_j...]
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 7:44 PM
> > > > > To: netepic_at_egroups.com
> > > > > Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] Slann victorious again?
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Hellreich!
> > > > >
> > > > > Your point about the Bloodletters is, of course, true. But also
> > > > > consider that Chaos does not have good long range firepower.
> > > > > Bloodletters must make a slow appoach. A stand of them,
> > knocked down to
> > > > > regenerate, will stop the whole detachment, due to unit
> > cohesion.
> > > > >
> > > > > The Necrons, if they retain the jump ability, avoid this
> > problem neatly.
> > > > > First Fire, and Snap fire is not allowed against them.
> > > > >
> > > > > Bloodletters are useless, if they don't get into Close Combat.
> > Almost
> > > > > any Marine force can Snap fire against them, limit thier
> > movement, then
> > > > > destroy them at range. Also, in order to take the
> > Bloodletters, you
> > > > > would also have to purchase a Greater Deamon of Korne. You
> > can't JUST
> > > > > buy the Bloodletters like you can the Necrons.
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you think about the Scarabs? The fluff says they
> > USUALLY
> > > > > accompany a Necron force. Do you purchase these for your
> > Necrons
> > > > > usually? If not, then I suggest we change the Fluff, or make
> > them
> > > > > mandatory.
> > > > >
> > > > > Warprat ;)
> > > > >
> > > > > hellreich wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Necron Infantry should not be able to warp jump, they did not
> > have
> > > > this
> > > > > > before and some how it has snuck in. They should be slow
> > moving
> > > > troops,
> > > > > that
> > > > > > have to spend points on transports to move fast this is were
> > the
> > > > messup
> > > > > is.
> > > > > > As for your math it is a good point be a febble one at that,
> > try this
> > > > one
> > > > > > and tell me who wins 600 pts of Bloodletters to 600 pts of SM
> > forces.
> > > > > these
> > > > > > guys are about the same as Necron but they get to regen in CC.
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: warprat <warprat_at_j...>
> > > > > > To: <netepic_at_egroups.com>
> > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 6:13 AM
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] Slann victorious again?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Rune!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The result is very bad, for the Imperials. Sorry!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Warprat ;)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Karlsen Rune wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Is the cost unbalanced? If you take 600 points of CC SM
> > forces and
> > > > > > > > pitch them against the Necrons, what is the result?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Rune
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > From: warprat [mailto:warprat_at_j...]
> > > > > > > > Sent: 10. oktober 2000 11:55
> > > > > > > > To: netepic_at_egroups.com
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] Slann victorious again?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi Nils!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Are you sure about the regeneration? I was thinking the
> > same
> > > > thing as
> > > > > > > > you, BUT I couldn't find it in the rules. Anyway, very
> > few
> > > > Necrons
> > > > > were
> > > > > > > > killed by CC.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Even if -1 surprise mod is not used, and the Necrons
> > killed in CC
> > > > do
> > > > > not
> > > > > > > > regenerate, the end result is unballanced.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Warprat ;)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > nils.saugen_at_s... wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Two points, first Necrons killed in CC doesn't
> > regenerate,
> > > > secondly
> > > > > > > > > Hellreich/Darius mentioned thet the -1 to CAF modifyer
> > for units
> > > > > > charged
> > > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > > mechs popping out of the warp, was due to the size of
> > the mech!
> > > > So
> > > > > we
> > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > do not apply that penalty to units charget by warping
> > Necron
> > > > Assault
> > > > > > > > > warriors.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Nils
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-
> > unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-
> > unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-
> > unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _____NetZero Free Internet Access and Email______
> > > > > > http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
> > > > >
> > > > > To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
Received on Wed Oct 11 2000 - 13:59:12 UTC