I have no problem with them just make the weapon choice a dice roll for each stand and weapons jams on a 6 for the turn and 1,2, for the heavy bolters.
Thomas Wildman <tnrw00_at_...> wrote: I remember suggesting inclusion of the Chaos marines introduced in 40K last
year or so. They wer called Obliterators or somesuch, and in 40K could
vhange their bodies into any heavy weapons available to infantry. Stats
might be MV10 CAF 1 Wpn Variable: 2 shot 50cm 5+TH -1 SV Autocannon
1 shot 75cm 4+TH -2 SV Lascannon
1 shot 50cm 4+TH -1 SV Hvy Bolter
1 shot 50cm 4+TH -3 SV Plasma Cannon
250 pts for four stands, 3 models per stand
Last time I suggested them, I was nearly laughed at. Maybe they're more
acceptable now?
Tom
> SM chapters has been there all the time. As has most IG, ork and chaos
> units. I agree that one could make new units for the squats, as we have in
> the past. Hellfury, Gyrokoper Varians, assault tanks and Grudgekeeper
> artillery, to name a few. However, I strongly oppose units that are out ov
> the Natural order for the squats. Namly cheap infantry (Short beards) and
> close assault infantry (Slayers). These are units that eliminates known
> weaknesses in the squat army. I know these units will only be optional,
but
> ar things often are once they are there it's hard to deny a player the
usage
> of them. Especially because one might have been using other optional units
> in the past.
>
> Trygve made an interesting comment last week. If the short squats should
> have Shortbeards/Slayers why shouldn't Chaos have some long range heavy
> infantry units. The IG could sure use som nifty assault troops them
selves,
> how about some drugcrazed Ogryns with +8 in caf and exoskeleton armour
> giving them a fixed save of 4+. How about a Space Marine Preatorian, Black
> orks Clans, Eldar aspect warrior companies the list could go on and on.
>
> Poin is: IF IT AINT BROKE DON'T TRY TO FIX IT.
>
> Just my 2 kroner.
>
> Nils
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: eivind.borgeteien_at_... [mailto:eivind.borgeteien_at_...]
> Sent: 12. juni 2001 13:23
> To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Sv: RE: [NetEpic ML] On the new squat units
> Sensitivity: Confidential
>
>
> We are not trying improve the Squat armiy in terms of intoducing better
and
> cheesier units, only to give them some more choices to choose from. The
> squat army is the same every time you field it, its variation we are
trying
> to achieve here.
>
> Every player that owns a Squat army has put a lot of money in it but
> recieved no support from GW beyond the first release. Sm has a lot of
> chapters to choose from, orks also have a lot to choose from, only
surpassed
> by IG and Chaos has recieved two new armylists.
>
> I think its highly on time that some new choices are added to the little
> guys, so any constructive suggestion here are very welcome!
>
> Eivind
> >
> > Fra: nils.saugen_at_...
> > Dato: 2001/06/12 Tue AM 11:32:22 CEST
> > Til: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> > Emne: RE: [NetEpic ML] On the new squat units
> >
> > Hm, yes but one should perhaps then concentrate on winning with the
units
> > one has got, rather than to make new ones? Remember that even if the
> Squats
> > haven't won many games in our group, they have probably done so in many
> > other groups. It all comes down to deviceing a winning strategy. Let us
> > change armies for a couple of battles and see how tings works out!!!!
> Rather
> > than to introduce new armies to unbalance the squats. Actually, I
consider
> > the squats one of the hardest armies to beat!
> >
> > Nils
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: eivind.borgeteien_at_... [mailto:eivind.borgeteien_at_...]
> > Sent: 12. juni 2001 11:13
> > To: netepic_at_yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [NetEpic ML] On the new squat units
> > Sensitivity: Confidential
> >
> >
> > One of the main grudges people have against the squats is that they are
> hard
> > to break. The Shortbeards are much easier to break and should provide
some
> > easier VPs for the oponent. This way it should be very well balanced.
> >
> > The Slayer Cult is taken from WFB and I think it would have been
> introduced
> > sooner or later if GW has continued their squat range for epic. At least
> > thats my personal POV...
> >
> > It WAS introduced as a joke, but then as a Companycard with 3
> detatchments,
> > with +6, +7 or something in CAF. As a specialcard of one detatchment
with
> > far reduced CAF, I think this units deserves some testing.
> >
> > Isnt it food for thought that the only ones crying "wolf!" here are the
> ones
> > that always have beaten the Squats.....? :-)
> >
> > There are at present time no stats for the APC carrying the robots. I
> havent
> > gotten around to do that yet, but you might want to take a look at the
> > Hellfury APC
> >
> > 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/
>
>
> 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/
RuneSmith Studio "we bring the art to war"
15 Summit Ave.
Albany, NY. 12209
http://odin.prohosting.com/quester6
---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Personal Address - Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
Received on Tue Jun 12 2001 - 19:56:58 UTC