Re: [Epic] Psychic Phase [was: Re: Titan Legions]

From: Aaron P Teske <Mithramuse+_at_...>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:10:15 -0500 (EST)

Excerpts from Epic: 20-Jan-97 Re: [Epic] Psychic Phase [w.. by Brett
> >> Guild Biker Forces.
> >> The best bikes in the game (+4 CAF) and almost the cheapest. (Only IG get
> >> cheaper bikes and then only just cheaper.) And if these stumpy bikes ever
> >> break (not likely!) they don't vanish like IG bikes!
> >
> >Oh, that's right, because it's better than IG, it MUST be cheesy. I can't
> >beleive this, you are comparing two units and saying the better one is
> >cheesy???
> No, I'm comparing all of the similar units and suggesting that since one of
> them costs the same as almost all of the others and is actually
> substantially better, (that would be higher CAF, better moral, higher
> breakpoint), then THAT would be cheesy...

Just a quick point: the Squat's don't pay for the higher breakpoint in
points when they're bought, they pay for it by giving more VPs when
they're finally broken. So basically you're paying a couple points
over, say, Marine bikes for a +1 CAF. <shrug>

> > And remember, if you DO break the company you get alot
> >of VP's for it...8 for a 600pt company. And yes, squats morale is better,
> >because they are SQUATS...
> Of course! And here I stupidly thought that their moral was better because
> they were "cheesy"! When all along it was because they were SQUATS...

Heh. It's kinda like how the Marines also have a 2+ morale because
they're Marines... and because you pay for the honor. An IG tac platoon
is 10 stands of dogfaces (10cm move, 50cm shot at 5+ 0) for 200 points.
A Squat Warrior squad is nine "tac" stands plus a Hearthguard for 250.
So, for the two points of morale and swapping the section HQ with a
Hearthguard, the Squats pay another 50 points. And, as far as I'm
concerned the Hearthguard is *not* worht 50 points. They're handy, but
they're not command stands and can be targetted if your opponenet so
desires, so they tend to die quickly. (And the higher breakpoint, as
I've said before, is paid for in VP: the 250 point Warrior squad coughs
up 4 VPs.)

> Actually, the orcs have pulsa rokkits too. The point which seems to have
> escaped you is that the squats get it cheaper and better than anyone else.
> And hardly anyone takes Landtrains, because Colossi are SO much cheesier...

Actually, in the US it's more because no one has the models -- they've
been out of production here for quite some time. You should've seen how
quickly they vanished from the racks at Games Day '96, when GWUS had a
special run of them done!

In my case, it's because I haven't painted one up yet, and I prefer not
fielding unpainted minis.

[Goliath Mega-Cannon]
> >That's right i get one barage per turn with each and it's variable. I
> >don't know what problems YOU'VE had with them, but they aren't as usful as
> >you think except against eldar. But yeah of course, somcething
> >potentially harding hitting than an IG barrage weapon so it's cheesy.
> That's CHEAPER _and_ HARDER HITTING. And, yeah, that's cheesy...

Actually, it's not harder hitting. (Bombards always get 9 BPs, and have
the same -3 save) And I'd imagine it's cheaper because there's only one
model, so it's easier to kill than a battery.

> >> Other units:
> >> Other units that cost the same as anyone elses units and have better break
> >> points thus giving up VP harder than other armies... (eg. Squat
> >> tarantulas have a break point of 4 out of 5 instaed of the usual 3 out of
> >> 5.)
> >
> >Yeah, that's the nature of squats, higher break points and better morale,
> more cheese...

Even if it's paid for?

> >eldar, Space
> >Marine, Squats, Chaos, etc... all you have done is pick out good units for
> >squats and call them cheesy CAUSE THEY ARE GOOD... you compared them to
> >other units and called them cheesy cause they are better...
> Better AND cheaper OR better and the same cost. I compared the squat stuff
> to the second third and fourth best units of the same type and the squats
> came up trumps every time.

Erm, I wouldn't say that. Near the top, yes, on the top, no, especially
if you come up with some situations. For example, even given the TL
skimmer rules, I'd usually rather have Eldar Jetbikes, just because my
opponents will pin one or two bikes in a squad with something that's
either very cheap or very mean, and then my squad can't go where I want
it to go... the Eldar don't have that problem. And you never really
brought up the Squat infnatry; I don't think you can call Berserkers the
cream of the crop when it comes to close combat. ^_-

> You don't seem particularly convinced by any of my arguments, but then it is
> wisely written that "there are none so blind as those who will not see".
> (Which means in this case that if you don't want the answer, don't ask the
> question.)

I'd counter that you don't seem particularly convinced by our (myself,
Mark, and... er. Oops! Whoever you're replying to here. I don't
suppose you can put a name up top, instead of "you wrote:"?)... anyway,
our arguements either. <shrug>
                    Aaron Teske
                    Squat Leader, Den'Len Fetch
Received on Mon Jan 20 1997 - 13:10:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:09:01 UTC