RE: [Epic] Orks with LandRaiders

From: Mike Bowen <mbowen_at_...>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 13:24:35 -0500 (CDT)

On Mon, 25 Aug 1997, Miller, Chris wrote:

>
> >
> >the more different types, the better. just no more special rules.
>
> -----> Not sure I agree with this, but I'm open
> I could see an assault oriented unit, a shooty unit, and an AT unit...

one of the nice things with E40k, is you can make most things fit
under the current weapons.

the orks with 3 type of wagons/tanks would be ok

1. gutrippas, etc=(assault)
2. gobsmashas, etc=(shooty)
3. braincrusha, etc=(AT)

and maybe use the old plastic BW as rhinos, transport 1, and hitch lift.

after all, in 40k terms the BW and Rhino do the same thing,
transport troops and blow up, or blow up and kill transported troops.

>
> >are you really that worried if an ork player uses LR, all is lost?
> >
> ------> No, but the players who want to take these usually want to take
> a lot, and IMO if you want to play with a lot of LR's then perhaps
> you should take the marines and let someone else play orks.
>

I would limit any Blood Axe LR to 2-3. any more is cheeze.


> Also, using the Blood Axe opening, why stop at LR's? Why can't I
> >have T-hawks?

agree, no deathstrikes fo orks, though i like the idea of
ork drop kanz would be nice for use as drop pods.

since its orc tech, a roll of 1 or 2 means no parachute, >SPLAT<

>

> The problem is that many people want to make
> the army fit their favorite tactics, rather than choosing tactics to fit
> the army. AT shots are often used with a "park & shoot" type army which
> marines are very very good at(stubborn, rapid fire, high armor value),

that was my main beef with E40k. in SM you could have an shooty ork army
or a assault based army, or a mix.

E40k almost forces the orks to assault

which wouldn't of been bad if the orks could have kept the
deathroller rules.

sorry, I'm a big fan of overruns. would have lots better for the marines
to roll 4,5,6 or >SQUISH< when the b.fortress rolls over them

"snap fire THIS, humie!" >CRUNCH<

mike
Received on Mon Aug 25 1997 - 18:24:35 UTC