RE: [NetEpic ML] Return of the Slann first test: (long)

From: Karlsen Rune <rune.karlsen_at_...>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 13:00:50 +0100

We arent really talking about the mech prices, they seem
OK to me. I agree we need more testing, but none of
us have the time to playtest Slann against all the
armies, then vote for the rule changes, then playtest
again. Also, see my previous post :)

Rune

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eivind Borgeteien [mailto:eivind.borgeteien_at_...]
> Sent: 21. februar 2001 00:16
> To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] Return of the Slann first test: (long)
>
>
> Hi
> Its nice to see some activity on this list again. Before I
> comment on the
> suggested changes I will state for the record that the Grand
> Warlord of the
> Squats can add his initiativbonus AFTER the roll is made. The
> rules on page
> 3 in the Squat Armylist explicitly says so. This is the only
> power the Grand
> Warlord have, and a slow moving army like the squats really need it.
>
> My first thought was that this also should apply to the slann
> mage, but then
> I took a look at the price and changed my mind. The Grand Warlord
> accompanied by two hearthguard costs 150 points. The slann
> mage costs the
> same, but in addition it has a number of other advantages so
> I guess the
> original wording is OK.
>
> On the battlereport: If the Mechs where taken out by shadowswords and
> deathstrike missiles, I see no reason to make them cheaper.
> This is the two
> most deadly weapons in the game and should be able to take
> out anything.
>
> I think we should play a couple of more games before we finetune the
> beta-rules. I'd say a total of 5 or 6 games with the current
> rules, then
> some fine tuning, then 5 or 6 more games before we do the
> final changes.
> This was just ONE game. Lets keep the rules as is for now and have the
> suggested changes in mind when playing.
>
> Eivind
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Hellreich" <helreich_at_...>
> To: <netepic_at_yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 6:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] Return of the Slann first test: (long)
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Even though i havnt tested them, the Exodus Ghost
> > > warriors also now have a range of 50cms. They
> > > are also supposed to be HW support, and need 75cms
> > > range. There are probably also some other units
> > > which need 75 cms range (HW units which previously
> > > had 75cms), like the Dracon Raiders. This would have
> > > to be checked also.
> >
> > !!! well as I said before the Exodus need no changes done
> to them, for all
> I
> > really did was to copy other units. Example the Ghost
> Warriors are really
> > Long Fangs.
> >
> > >
> > > The new warp jump rules also need a tiny modification,
> > > which i know Nils agrees with. There should be no
> > > deviation on a roll of 3-4, but rather a "neutral zone". :)
> > > Losing the special warp jump bonuses AND displacing
> > > is just too harsh for this we think.
> >
> > !!! come on when one messes with the warp there should be
> draw backs. Just
> > the way it is.
> > >
> > > The old prices on the rest of the units tested, besides
> > > those mentioned here, seems OK so far. We calculated
> > > the Necron Stalkers with the cost formula, and came
> > > to 550. This is also too high, and Nils and I thought
> > > that 450 would be a more accurate price. Yes, they do
> > > have warp jump, and the necron abilities, but they
> > > simply aren't worth the points.
> >
> > !!! I have found the the cost formula is worthless, and is
> all but useless
> > when tring to factor in that they repair. Come on you had
> bad dice. These
> > things have a save of 1+, plus if hit they have a 4+ roll
> to repair, You
> get
> > 3 of them.
> >
> > >
> > > One thing we wondered about, is the one time +1 initiative
> > > bonus the great mage gives. Is this to be decided to
> > > use before the roll is made, or can it be used after
> > > the roll? I know the squats have a unit which gives
> > > a one time +1 ins mod. , and Eivind has in the past
> > > decided to use this after the ins roll is made. Is this
> > > correct, and if so, is the great mage ins mod to be
> > > used in the same way?
> >
> > !!!You say you are using it before you roll, same goes for
> the Squats. You
> > say I want to use my +1 to I roll then roll the die.
> >
> > >
> > > Another thing which came up : Nils used Hellbores
> > > and Moles. When these do deviate, do they get to
> > > move the 15cms? When he deviated (3 times i think),
> > > he rolled low on the d6, and could easily move them
> > > back to the intended target position. After the game,
> > > Nils thought he had probably interpreted these rules
> > > wrongly. What is correct?
> >
> > !!! yup the troops get to move freely, very deadly thing
> for the Slann to
> > have to deal with. The way it works is like this you say
> you want it to
> > surface, then roll for deveation, then place the bore model
> on the board,
> > then the troops from inside may move freely. What one has
> to do is kill
> his
> > HQ's for those troops. For if you kill them then they have
> no Command and
> > may not be given orders.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > > > ---------------------~-~>
> > > > eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups
> > > > Click here for more details
> > > > http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/7255/_/982662894/
> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > -------_->
> > > >
> > > > 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
> >
> >
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ---------------------~-~>
> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups
> Click here for more details
> http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/7255/_/982711091/
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -------_->
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
Received on Wed Feb 21 2001 - 12:00:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 10:59:16 UTC