It seems like we got a rather loud minority here, but I'd say we do
the right thing and let the poll decide.
Just one question, is this one of the polls we should have a 2/3
majority to change the rules?
Eivind
--- In netepic_at_egroups.com, quester <quester666_at_y...> wrote:
>
>
>
> hellreich <hellreich_at_n...> wrote:
>
> now does this seem like taking an easy thing, like charging , and
making it a whole bag of worms
>
> please leave the rules as is and let the one on one thing be opp.
to thoese of you that use it as a rule it will be about 5 pages long
with all its exceptions and examples and overcomplacates CC. remember
if you pile on to much your wasting your man power,and i ve made
manny an opponit pay for that and all that pile makes for a nice
blast targetin the advance fire ph.
>
> this 1 on 1 rule changes the whole way the game is played and game
balance goes all to hell and as for tactics lots of them go away
> all i m saying is let it alone you will play the way you want and
you don t have to change the rules to do it and mess up the game
> well your point about jump troops and skimmers is mute, if they can
jump
> over woods and biulding then they surly can jump over a line of
foot troops.
> As for other troops that move as normal then yes they would have to
stop and
> fight for your troops would not just let them run by them without
taking a
> wack or two at them. If you attack a 20 unit orks with 2/ 5 unit
Eldar then
> you would have to put one of each eldar on to 10 of the Orks thus
you would
> only be assulting 10 of the 20 orks, now if the ork player has
charge orders
> then he could double up on the Eldar but if not he can only wait
till AF
> phase and shoot you.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: warprat <warprat_at_j...>
> To: <netepic_at_egroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 5:28 AM
> Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] Core Vote
>
>
> > Hi Eivind!
> >
> > Comments on your comments.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---> eivind borgeteien wrote:
> >
> > > 2) If two smaller detachments attack a larger one, can they
double up
> > > on
> > > the same defender, or must they attack enemy units of the same
enemy
> > > detachment, not engaged by the first attacking detachment?
> > >
> > > ---> They must attack enemy units of the same enemy detachment,
not
> > > engaged by the first attacking detachment.
> > >
> > > What if the second detachment does not have the movement to
engage new
> > >
> > > enemies?
> > >
> > > --->Then they can double up on units within their range
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > This seems like cheeze to me. Either they can freely double up,
or they
> > can't. It's too easy to arrange a situation like this.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 4) If I space my infantry 6cm apart from each other, in a line,
does
> > > this mean the enemy must attack each stand in the detachment,
before
> > > moving through it? Or, can the enemy penetrate the line,
without
> > > moving
> > > within 1cm of a stand.
> > >
> > > ---> He can penetrate your line if he can get between the units
> > > without getting within 1 cm of either of your stands. Skimmers
and inf
> > > with jumppack can fly over them either way.
> > >
> >
> > This is not how I understand it. The fact that the Skimmers/Jump
Troops
> > cannot be pinned, does not mean they can fly over the tops of
enemy
> > units. If you move within 1cm of an enemy stand/model, you are
> > initiating Close Combat and must stop to battle that
stand/model. You
> > must have Close Combat orders.
> >
> > Also, in my opinion, a line of troops should not be able to be
moved
> > through and ignored, if these Core Rules are adopted.
> >
> > Hey, if a formation can not be ignored, (hence you must attack
the whole
> > detachment ), then you should not be allowed to move through it
also. At
> > least untill each stand in the enemy detachment has been Close
> > Assaulted, AND there is room to fit in between stands (farther
than 1cm)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 5) Are Command units considered detachments. How would combat
be
> > > initiated against them?---> As normal
> > >
> > > --->Where they are listed as separate detachments, they are
regarded
> > > as such. A SM company is listed with 3 detachments + one
captain, the
> > > captain is a seperate unit, also a chaplain bought as a
specialcard.
> > > The squat bikerguild has a different structure, where the
guildmasters
> > > are listed "within" the bikersquads, and not as seperate
detachments.
> > > Just take a look at the armylists.
> > >
> >
> > So, it IS possible to double, triple, etc... up on a detachment,
IF it
> > is small enough. Big detachments, like Orks, do have an
advantage over
> > smaller formations, like Eldar.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 6) How are the large "Pile On" battles resolved? Please give a
good
> > > example of one.
> > >
> > > ---> I posted an example some time ago, I'll repost it here as a
> > > powerpoint attachment. Hope it can help...
> > >
> >
> >
> > Sorry, your powerpoint attachment didn't show up. (Did I miss it
> > somehow?) Could you please tell me where you posted it?
Thanks ;)
> >
> >
> > What does everyone else think?
> >
> > Warprat ;)
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
> >
> >
>
>
> ____________NetZero Free Internet Access and Email_________
> Download Now http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
> Request a CDROM 1-800-333-3633
> ___________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>
>
> eGroups Sponsor
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
>
> "Is it time to play?"
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do You Yahoo!?
> From homework help to love advice, Yahoo! Experts has your answer.
Received on Wed Nov 01 2000 - 23:04:12 UTC