On 22 Jan 97 at 21:49, Perrin Haley wrote:
> >> It seems to me that most of us call cheesy anything in an opponents army
> >> that is hard to destroy.
> >> Be it the eldar doomweaver. Which as an eldar player I find next to use
> >> less. Or the squat super heavy vehicles etc... I have to agrre with
> >> the person that said that every army has it's strengths and weakness .
> >> So to win we have to get beyond that cry of cheese and get into
> >> exploting those weaknesses.
> >> Later
> >> John
> >I'm glad to find someone else with the same opinion of Doomweavers.
> >Since subscribing to the list I've been astounded at the number of
> >refrences to Doomweavers as cheesy. As an Elder player I rarely
> >field them, as the usually proove next to useless.
> Hear hear! I have to agree with you on this one, as I often question why I
> shelled out the cash to buy the models in the first place. The few times
> I've ever had mild success was when I played an Ork opponent with some
> truly "orky" tactics; really thick concentrations of troops and vehichles,
> where there was no room for a unit to dodge the web; slice and dice! But
> how often do you run into people who bunch up their units that much?
As someone who has been on the receiving end, I have to agree. The
Doomweavers are annoying, but not earthshattering. I have found that
they are most effective at flushing out troops holding an objective or
other critical point. Sort of encourages them to move. But, as far
as being a game breaker, I don't think so. If I were plaing Eldar,
I'd probably take a few more Deathstalkers or Firestorms rather than
Doomweavers. The same goes for the Warp Hunter. Nasty...if it hits.
As I play a Marine/Titan Legions army (working on IG), there aren't
enough massed units of mine on the board to be caught by a wildly
scattering template. Just my two cents.
Received on Thu Jan 23 1997 - 06:16:24 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:09:02 UTC