re:[Epic] Titan inferiority
On 14 Jan 97 at 9:48, Cameron Bentsen wrote:
> In message "[Epic] Titan inferiority", you write:
> > At 02:14 PM 1/13/97 -0600, you wrote:
> > >Yeah, Imperator's got too few guns. It's too easy to kill him, unless
> > >you've got the Chaos "crap for guns" affliction.
> > Y'know, despite everyone bashing on Titans on the list, I like them a lot,
> > and they can be extraordinarily powerful if well played. Against the
> > Tyranids, an Imperator loaded with Terminators on the inside can be Death
> > Incarnated, since effectively all the Tyranid vehicles and Titans will be
> > useless, as they all have cruddy weapons and it automatically beats
> > non-Titans in CC and would trounce Tyranid Titans in close combat too (for
> > the most part, barring extreme circumstances). With a few detachments of
> > Devastators up top (keeping the Terminators in the bastions to defend them
> > from infantry CC) the firepower on that thing can be really astronomical.
> > If it ignored the vehicles and titans in the beginning and just went gunning
> > for the infantry, it could see the most major threat to it (boarding
> > actions) eliminated, and then it could pick off the rest at its leisure,
> > starting with vehicles that hit well, then vehicles with high save mods, etc
> > etc.
> > Of course, this is all theoretical. :P (but I _bet_ it would work!)
> > Michael who is a bearer of the Liu name
> Most Tyranid players would also consider it incredibly cheesy, unless you were
> playing in a very large game (enough points so that the Imperator and all
> troops inside comprise substantially less than half of your army.) The
> Imperator is supposed to be a super-rare Titan that is never fielded except as
> part of a whole army, and never without lots of support. If your opponent
> absolutely cannot win the game except by killing the Imperator (no matter what
> race he plays, although this is obviously more of a problem with the Tyranids)
> he is likely to get very ticked off at you. Especially if you're using battle
> honours to make your Imperator nigh-invulnerable.
> Now, if this were part of a scenario, and your opponent knew he'd be facing
> an Imperator (and little else) beforehand, then it's possible he might agree
> to play you if he thought he could figure out a way to beat the Imperator.
> Nevertheless, the game could easily turn out to be very one-dimensional and
> thus boring. Turn one: we blast each other. Turn two: we blast each other.
> Etc, etc, etc...
Of course, if the scenario had an alternative method of gaining victory
points, it could work. I remember reading an Epic scenario in WD
called Breakthrough. It was Eldar vs. Chaos with Eldar on the defense.
Chaos received twice as many points as the Eldar. Chaos received
victory points for getting units off the Eldar's table edge while the
Eldar received victory points for killing units (obviously). I don't
remember all the details; as I recall, someone is going to post it
soon. Anyway, the point is that something similar could be done with
the Imperator. One side takes a Tech Guard Defense Company, a Tech
Guard Heavy Weapons Platoon, and an Imperator (2900 points). The other
side gets 5800 points of whatever army he plays. The Imperator get
points for breaking units and the other side gets victory points equal
to the victory point value of whatever units he moves off the
Imperator's side. I haven't tried this yet, but I have been wanting to
for a while. It would pose interesting tactical problems for the
attacker (Do I completely ignore the Imperator and concentrate on my
advance?). It might even be fun. If anyone out there tries this, let
me know what happens.
Received on Tue Jan 14 1997 - 17:09:54 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:08:59 UTC