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

From: Shawn Zumwalt <teznet_at_...>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 14:22:57 -0800

OK. This lurker is going to step out on the chopping block. I could see
the CSMs getting T-Hawks and teleportation abilities if you're playing a
Horus Heresy-era army. They've turned to chaos but haven't gotten all of
the chaos abilities. This would essentially mean they are regular SMs
painted in chaos colors. You could even do this with IG. SHV and all, but
no demon armies.

Outside of the Heresy, I would imagine the equipment would just wear out,
with no way to replace it. I can imagine a Beastman trying to repair a
T-Hawk.
    "Hey, Lard-breath, give me the electro-spanner"
    "Lard-breath, why you..."
    Sounds of delicate equipment breaking

Anyway, that's my story and I'm sticking to it. I'll just fade back to my
lurking.

Shawn

"Sometimes there just ain't enough rocks"

teznet_at_...
shawn.zumwalt_at_...
----- Original Message -----
From: <deaconblue3_at_...>
To: <netepic_at_egroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] Re: New file uploaded to netepic


> 'Ere we go again! Amazing how somethings never seem to go away isn't it?
> Anyway, I'm one of those who likes to get some more for Chaos,
> especially CSMs. Now, for my take on things, I'll try and go issue by
> issue.
> 1. Transports. Rhinos, LRs, etc should only be available and
> usable by CSMs. I just can't really see Demons or the monstrous critters
> (trolls, Minotaurs) getting in or out of them easily, or willingly. Like
> Ogryns, they shouldn't be able to use them (Ogryns don't like dark
> cramped places, like rhinos). Rhinos should be part of the Chaos list,
> available for use by CSMs only.
> 2. The infamous T-Hawk issue. Well, I do think Chaos should get
> them, but at an increased point cost (x2 at least), with the restriction
> it be used solely by CSMs. No transporting Demons or monstrous types.
> Also, they should only be able to get 1 for every 1000 points or so of
> CSMs (and CSMs only. Points for the others don't count).
> 3. Chaos can't get everything in the Imp lists. No Imperators,
> no SHVs (imagine a Chaos army with a CI or Leviathan, plus Shadowswords
> and baneblades, YIKES!), and much of the "newer" parts of the Marine list
> are also unavailable.
> 4. The "combination" issue. Chaos and the Imps are supposed to
> be the big nasties of the universe. Chaos and Imps should match up
> almost equally against each other. That's the fundamental theorem of how
> the 40K universe is. Eldar are good, but lack umbers. Orks are
> mediocre, but have lots of numbers. Squats are somewhere in between.
> Bugs are nasty, running the gambit across the spectrum. Never used or
> played against Slann, but they should be in the same category as the
> Eldar.
> The Imperials generally use combined arms, drawing from the
> various organizations to form a force. IG with Marines and Titan
> support. (I still don't think the TG should be separate army). Yes,
> they do operate individually on a regular basis, but the "norm" is for
> combined arms. Chaos is similar. The four powers have their own unique
> flavor, and the combine to form Black Crusades, or raids on worlds. It's
> the nature of the beast as it were.
> I still find the issue of combining lists somewhat off center.
> the issue I think is not the lists, but the players involved. As Peter
> has pointed out on several occasions, there is no truly "invincible" army
> out there. Since I started playing, I have always played a combined
> IG/SM army. I lose as often as I win. Same applies for when I play
> Chaos. Chaos needs more support, with only the Khorne Demon engines, and
> the only fliers being Silver Towers, Fire Lord, and Doom Wings (none of
> which are all that great). With out these additions, you can usually
> defeat a Chaos army with lots of artillery, pounding them to bits before
> they ever get in CC. I know, I've done it. Also, Chaos really doesn't
> have an AA unit, so they are highly vulnerable to air power.
> Play balance is all fine and well, when it makes sense.
> Sometimes however, play balance gets sacrificed to fit the concepts. If
> you want true play balance, play Heresy era only, using only the Imperial
> lists against other Imperial lists. Or just play Eldar vs Eldar. That's
> play balance. still, even if using identical army lists, play balance is
> skewed by the players themselves. Experienced vs inexperienced, or just
> a difference in styles alters the balance. A good player can win no
> matter the armies being used under most circumstances. Random dice also
> factor in too don't forget.
> No offense intended here, but I see most of the arguments against
> something as whining over an inability to defeat certain armies (or
> players). Changing the rules so you can win on a regular basis is much
> more cheezy than using what's in the army lists IMO. Not that I am
> saying that is the case, I don't know for sure, but that is how it
> appears at times. OK, I think I've run my corse for now....
>
> Josh R
>
> Minister for General Mayhem
> "Don't let the bastards grind you down." Gen. Joseph Stilwell
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
>
Received on Tue Jan 16 2001 - 22:22:57 UTC