Hi!
Thats probably the wiser move, the spawnguard have better CAF, it would
make the unit very expensive, still the fire power is better, if they
are 900 by formula, how mcuh would the spawnguard be?
Peter
Karlsen Rune wrote:
> No, Nils and I suggested the Spawnguards stay the same, and the Gravguards
> take on
> the role of HW support with a lighter version of the laser. 2 at's, 75cm,
> 4+, -2 at a cost
> of 900 (according to the formula)
>
> Rune
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eivind Borgeteien [mailto:eivind.borgeteien_at_...]
> Sent: 26. februar 2001 14:17
> To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] Slann battle report
>
>
> Hi
> How about the usual AT stats for infantry, 2 dice, 75 cm, -1 modifier, 5+ to
> hit and since they are supposed to be good, lets throw in a 50 cm missile
> also.
>
> I belive it was this Nils suggested after the test-battle.
>
> Eivind
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Peter Ramos <mailto:primarch_at_...>
> To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:netepic_at_yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 1:53 PM
> Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] Slann battle report
>
> Hi!
>
> I think it was suggested among us that these should probably get less attack
> dice and the 75cm range to function as an anti-armor units. Perhaps one
> attack die 75cm range, -2 modifier and 4+ to hit and a 50cm missile.
>
> Hows that?
>
> Peter
>
> Karlsen Rune wrote:
>
>
> Hi!
>
> This is good news! I just have one question : What shall we
> do with the spawnguards if the Gravguards stay the way
> they are? They are so similar, they fill the same role.
>
> Rune
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Ramos [ mailto:primarch_at_...
> <mailto:primarch_at_...> ]
> Sent: 25. februar 2001 18:15
> To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:netepic_at_yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [NetEpic ML] Slann battle report
>
>
> Hi!
>
> Well, we got some playtesting done, both games were similar
> in results
> (close games), so heres one of them from the slann perspective.
>
> Slann forces
> Gravguard company
> Necron raider company
> Necron assault company
> Frog Mech pod
> Necron titan
>
> Small force, but I contructed armies to test the major
> changes in rules
> (warp jump), stat changes (gravguard, necron) and new units (titan).
>
> Squat forces
> Cyclops
> Collosus
> Leviathan
> Squat brotherhood
> Squat bike company
> Squat gyrocopter company
> One tarantula detachment
> 2 !
>
> rhino detachments
> 1 ironhammer detachment
> 1 goliath mega-cannon
> 1 thunderer detachment
>
> Each force is 4050 points. This is a rare battle were the squats have
> numerical superiority.
>
> The objectives were in two ruins on the two flanks with an
> objective in
> the woods in the center.
>
> Turn one
>
> Necron assaults warp jump to all three objectives to take them, while
> advance elements of the squat bike company engaged necron
> assault units
> in the woods and right flank.
>
> Gravguard and raiders followed on advance orders to give
> cover fire. The
> necron titan went for the bikes to and to get in range of the goliath
> mega cannon.
>
> The squats sent out their gyrocopters deep into the slann
> lines to cause
> havoc. Using the hq gyrocopters line of sight, many barrages
> fell in the
> raiders lines knocking some out, but most would return next
> turn after
> their repair rolls.
>
> Slann kmights jump for!
>
> !
>
> wrd through the center and right flank
> in support
> to engage the hosts of thunderers there. I risked a long 60cm
> jump with
> commander bonus and lost one mech to the warp, but fell very close to
> the thunderers.
>
> Squat first fire started to pound me with the praetorians and goliath
> shooting many barrges. dmamge in the nend was minimal. The
> necron titan
> was a fire magnet, shot after shot hit it and either the armor or the
> self-repair thwarted them all. Our fears of a pushover target were
> rapidly fading.. Return fire for the slann was mostly in the advance
> phase. Close combat left the woods in slann hands while
> assault necrons
> suffered badly in the right flank.
>
> The left flank was mostly in slann hands for the remainder
> of the game.
>
> Slann fire was devastating. The necron titan took out a whole
> detachment
> of thunderers and the goliath cannon. Back up fire from
> gravguards and
> raiders wiped out!
>
> !
>
> most of the bikes and gyrocopters.
>
> Due to the suats high break point not much was given although they
> suffered grievous losses. The mech pod sustained its break point.
>
> Turn one Slann 18, squats 13
>
> Turn two
>
> I sense I could finish this now so I moved in for the kill.
> My raiders
> and gravguard moved in advance further forward while the remaining
> assault forces consolidated the objectives.
>
> The squats moved in their remaining bikes to attack the
> center and right
> flanks, the praetorians moved closer. The whole brotherhood company
> moved to the left flank, but were too far to make it to the objective.
>
> Squat fired relentlessly into the necron titan, the thing was
> impervious, not one shot got through. more casualties poured into the
> raiders and necron assault. The Necron titan destroyed the
> reminders of
> the bike compnay breaking it. The squat held the right flank,
> but lost
> the center and left. !
>
> !
>
> Frog mechs jumped deep into squat lines,
> destroyed
> remaining thunderers and tarantula detachment. They started
> wroking on
> the cyclops downing shields.
>
> It was mostly a shooting turn with both sides dishing out a lot of
> casualties. Repair rolls were not so good to me now and a lost a lot
> more. The assault company broke.
>
> Slann 34, Squats 22
>
> Turn three
>
> I needed to break that brotherhood on the far left, so my titan went
> that route. It was a gamble since I would leave my exposed
> back to the
> praetorians (in retrospect a very bad idea). I mustered what
> I could to
> take the right flank. The squats had so little left they
> could not hope
> to take the center and left. My gravguard and raiders moved closer.
>
> It was mainly shooting this turn.
>
> I could not muster enough forces to take the right flank and
> praetorian
> fire started to hurt as it broke the gravguards and raiders.
> The final
> b!
>
> !
>
> low was a hit got through the mighty titans defenses and turned the
> reactor off, then a second shot penetrated the head. The titan still
> stood, scarabs busily repairing damage. The third and final
> shot ripped
> through the head bursting it open. In the final act of defiance it
> toppled over bringing down a nearby gyrocopter.
>
> Then I knew it was truely over.....
>
> Slann 43, Squats 46
>
> Comments
>
> CRAAAAP! What a heartbreaker! I played a good game until turn
> three. I
> should have charged the praetorians and make them eat warp
> talon stew.
> In the end my infantry broke the brotherhood, I gambled and
> lost. Great
> game!
>
> Regarding the slann units, quite frankly, I would not change
> anything.
> The gravguard functioned superbly with their 50cm range. They are
> infantry support so as used them as such. The combination of
> following
> my assaults in advance was real good, even when the squats won close
> co!
>
> !
>
> mbat I'd mop up the victory very easily with their
> devastating fire. I
> think if you want 75cm range you should by vehicles, thats
> what they are
> for. They dont need the range, they are excellent as is.
>
> The Assaults and raider lower CAF worked out very well too.
> The raiders
> are very good shooters a good counterpart to the assault troops.
>
> The warp jump rules are superb, just what is expected, the longer the
> jump the bigger the risk, everyone was very satisfied how they worked.
>
> The necron titan worked extremely well, granted I was pretty lucky.
> Darius and I agreed it should cost 750 points or so. I agree
> with Rune
> that it should repair on a 3+ like other slann titans. Its
> only defense
> is thsi save, especially versus mega-weapons like the cyclops
> beam. Its
> chances should be better than 50%, so a 3+ is better after all its a
> titan. The weapons are very good, one short range but many
> dice and the other very effective titan/tank killer.
>
> I await more testing from you guys, but on our end we are pretty much
> convinced we have achieved balance.
>
> Peter
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ---------------------~-~>
> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups
> Click here for more details
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/kWP7PD/pYNCAA/4ihDAA/JfNVlB/TM
> <http://us.click.yahoo.com/kWP7PD/pYNCAA/4ihDAA/JfNVlB/TM>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -------_->
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
> <mailto:netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
> <mailto:netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
> <http://rd.yahoo.com/M=180263.1329327.2922596.2/D=egroupmail/S=1700059081:N/
> A=589981/*http://adfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/644-1519-1039-0?983192963>
> Thousands of FREE Products after Rebate!
>
> <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=180263.1329327.2922596.2/D=egroupmail/S=17
> 00059081:N/A=589981/rand=669789963>
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
>
>
> To unsubscribe send e-mail to: netepic-unsubscribe_at_egroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
Received on Mon Feb 26 2001 - 13:20:07 UTC