RE: [NetEpic ML] Re: New file uploaded to netepic

From: <nils.saugen_at_...>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 11:31:01 +0100

> Woha,
>
> This is really an issue for you, isn't it....
>
> Well, I must say I agree with you on this one Luca. Anyway, it'll
> just be an optional unit!!!!

It's an issue because I've seen it happen countless times, and ALMOST
ALWAYS for chaos. I don't know why, it just happens again and again.

With other armies there's hardly any problem. I mean, look at
imperial ones: everyone agrees that it would be pretty stupid for any
given imperial commander not to use a "joint army", but since mixing
SM and IG would result in horrible cheese, no one gives a damn about
logic and settles for play balance (as it should be).


Actually I don't agree on this, but thats my opinion I guess.....


Then we get to chaos and...
"chaos should get Thunderhaws, after all, normal marines have them so
why not chaos?"
"chaos should be able to teleport terminators into battle, after all,
normal marines can do that so why not chaos?"
"chaos cultists should have heavy artillery, after all IG armies have
them and cultists are renegade IG"

and so on and so on. Hello? If logic gets dropped to preserve balance
in every other case, why chaos should be treated any differently?


Ever played against Slann????? I see your point, I while back I came to the
conclusion that one shouldn't make to drastic changes to the basic SM/TL
rules because there is infact a subtle and fragile balance in the game
already..... One should take care as not to break this balance. And I agree
Chaos has it's own feel and pros, and cons, as any army (As well as the
SM/IG combination). But if you take a close look on the three different
Chaos armies, you'll notise that they have teir own balance, so if you do
not combine them you'll have 3 separate balanced armies....

Nils


Luca Lettieri


To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
Received on Tue Jan 16 2001 - 10:31:01 UTC