No they are excellent!
-----Original Message-----
From: eivind.borgeteien_at_... [mailto:eivind.borgeteien@...]
Sent: 25. mai 2001 14:02
To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: Sv: RE: [NetEpic ML] unballanced armies
Sensitivity: Confidential
Hi
I just want to something concerning our houserule on buildings, in case
anyone should feel like adopting it.
We also have a set of flyer rules that limits the movement of flyers.
Netepic has a flat 100cm move on flyers we have done it different.
Transports and bombers have 40cm (80 on charge), figters have 50 cm (100 cm
on charge) This means that for turn one, all artillery is safe from bombing.
Thats part of the reason why we have made the most heavy artillery somewhat
weaker.
Its quite a drastic change, but it has developted over the years in our
gaming group to keep the ballance.
Eivind
PS Nils, do you want to change the flyerrules?
>
> Fra: nils.saugen_at_...
> Dato: 2001/05/25 Fri PM 01:32:52 CEST
> Til: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> Emne: RE: [NetEpic ML] unballanced armies
>
> Well the first thing you would like to avoid while playing against both
> Tyranids and Squats alike is to play games with fewer than 8 objectives.
In
> both cases this will place you at a disadvantage.
>
> I haven't played against the Nid's, but I've read the rules, and they seem
> quite easy to overcome, if you don't get suckered into close combat. Stay
> back and beat them to pulp before they are halfway across the table. Use
> rapid deploymentroops and snipers to take out their commanders.
Concentrate
> youre fire on the massed formations, if you hit their big monsters hit
them
> hard as hell making sure they don't regenerate all the wounds you inflict.
>
> As for the squats, they are really hard to beat. I did it once with
Necrons
> and it was a really close race. Since then the Necrons have been powered
> down, and I'm unsure if it is possible to take them with the Necrons now.
> Squats are few in number and their CAF and Mobility are not much to brag
> about. (Why they are allowed to field Rhinos is beond me). However, they
are
> very resillient and you'll find it very hard to breake their companies and
> kill their superheavies. So capturing objectivs is always important while
> fighting squats.
>
> As for the FORTRESS building rule we have adopted (Actually I can't ever
> remeber us formally agreeing on it)I would STRONGLY advice you against
> introduceing it. Firstly which armies have many weapons with the "destroys
> buildings" special ability? Squats and IG/TG. What do these armies lack?
> Good assault troops! Do you think that is a coincidence? Nope! So what you
> do is to deprive these armies of one of ther advantages. (I haven't
fielded
> IG much since this hous rule was adopted, concentrating on Space Marines,
> Necrons and lately Eldar instead.) Further your enemy KNOWS perfectly well
> that Buildings are potential deathtraps when facing these armies, so if he
> chooses to set up in a building anyway It's a calculated risk. Furher I
> don't like the "Ignores Cover" compensation. Because now even QUACKE
cannons
> ignores cover!!!! I don't thing that is a good thing!!!!
>
> Nils
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: eivind.borgeteien_at_... [mailto:eivind.borgeteien@...]
> Sent: 25. mai 2001 12:58
> To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [NetEpic ML] unballanced armies
> Sensitivity: Confidential
>
>
> Hi!
> Someone here had a mail where he complaianed about his opponents not
wanting
> to play up against his squat army.
>
> I think this is very sad, if you cant play against the squats who can you
> play against? Not IG as their firepower is stronger and BP in numbers are
> almost equal, not SM as their CAF is higher, not orks as their number is
> bigger, not eldar as their weapons are stronger (and cheesy would some
say,
> not me though)
>
> So, what is your oponents main grudge against these fellows?
>
>
> I cant give you a "how to beat the stunties" but having played them a
while
> I can point out what I think is difficult with fielding them. (I have lost
> more battles than I have won using them!)
>
> They have no infantry with good CAF. +2 at most, they have some +6 but
only
> one pr detachment, so almost every army can beat you in CC. If you want to
> beat your opponent in CC you have to swarm him, which leads to my other
> point.
>
> Few in numbers. This might sound odd as the companies are quite large. But
> because of the low CAF you have to committ at least 2/3 of a company to
gain
> controll of an OP. As the companies are quite expencive I never controll
> more than 3 in a 3k game.
>
> Bad movability. None of the companies have transports, but have to buy
them
> seperatly. If you do this your oponent can consetrate his fire on the
> transports, taking out 2 gives him one easy 1 VP. They do have termites
that
> can take them almost anywhere, but they risk comming great out of course!
>
> The third thing I really miss about the squats are the large
> armourformations of the IG and SM. Squats can field tanks, but only in
units
> of 3, which is to give away VPs.
>
> My group (or everyone except the IG player) has gone tired of the
> housewrecking of netepic. Because of that we have made the houses (not the
> ruins) twice as strong as the original netepic rules, meaning that our
> buildings have 4 hits. Weapons that affect buildings gives one hit,
weapons
> that destroys buildings gives only two but ignores cover to hit.
>
> You might suggest trying this rule to your opponents. In a 3k game I
destroy
> 1-2 buildings as opposed to 4-6.
>
> Hope this is going to be of some help...
>
> Eivind
>
>
>
> 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/
>
>
> 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/
>
>
>
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 Fri May 25 2001 - 12:06:57 UTC