Sv: RE: [NetEpic ML] unballanced armies

From: <eivind.borgeteien_at_...>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 11:09:42 +0200

Hehe...

I see that Rune really is on the warpath here, but since I have played a lot of battles using squats and only one of them had the potential of being a victory (all though never finished)any point increase on the praetorians is a big no-no in my book.

Eivind
>
> Fra: Karlsen Rune <rune.karlsen_at_...>
> Dato: 2001/05/31 Thu AM 10:10:27 CEST
> Til: "'netepic_at_yahoogroups.com'" <netepic_at_yahoogroups.com>
> Emne: RE: [NetEpic ML] unballanced armies
>
> I too have been amazed at how little the Squats have to pay for their
> Praetorians.
> They can outshoot anything short of an Eldar titan armed with pulslasers,
> but
> are 5 times more resilient. 650-750 sounds much more reasonable to me.
>
> Rune
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Ramos [mailto:primarch_at_...]
> Sent: 31. mai 2001 01:04
> To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [NetEpic ML] unballanced armies
>
>
>
> Hi!
>
> Hmmm.. very interesting points, you should have pointed that out during the
> revision, we could have up the cost. I see the merit in what you say, they
> are pretty more resilient know with templates, especially since vortex and
> other one-shot kills are now expensive, makes preatorians pretty nasty.
>
> What say others in this regard? I think the points cost Ryan states are on
> the money too, opinions?
>
> Peter
>
> Ryan Lawson wrote:
>
>
> Damn thats expensive! The original idea was to make preatorians worth
> their points by giving them templates, is templates and their original
> cost too good? I'd like to hear comments on this, since its a very
> interesting point.
>
>
> Squat praetorians have a LOT of firepower. They have better firepower than
> titans. They also have the FF and move ability which is also extremely
> valuable.
>
> In the old rules, the Colossus and Cyclops were pointed properly with regard
> to most everything.....but vortex missiles, warp missiles, gutbusters and a
> handful of other shield ignoring weapons skewed their value way too much.
>
> Adding hit locations to them made them withstand those one-shot kill
> weapons, but it also made them much more resilient against regular weapons
> and units. We found that they were too powerful with hit locations without
> an additional increase in points. The points I pay right now are little high
> probably, I figured it was better to overpay for them than underpay. Now
> that we have fielded them a few times as they are, I think 700 is more in
> line for a Colossus and 650 for a Cyclops. They take hits better than
> titans, have excelle!
>
> !
>
> nt firepower....but they have no weapon options and
> their maneuverability is nonexistent.
>
>
> 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/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> Yahoo! Website Services- Click Here!
> Yahoo! Website Services- Click Here!
>
> <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=201903.1443829.3021311.1268964/D=egroupmai
> l/S=1700059081:N/A=662184/rand=438768239>
>
> 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/> .
>
>
> ***********************************************
> This message confirms that this E-Mail
> has been scanned for the presence of
> Computer Virus, and deemed Virus-Free
> by F-Secure Antivirus
>
> Wed, 30 May 2001 19:03:51 -0400
> ***********************************************
>
>
>
>
> ***********************************************
> This message confirms that this E-Mail
> has been scanned for the presence of
> Computer Virus, and deemed Virus-Free
> by F-Secure Antivirus
>
> Thu, 31 May 2001 10:10:27 +0200
> ***********************************************
>
> 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 Thu May 31 2001 - 09:09:42 UTC

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