Re: [Epic] Squat 40K List

From: Alun Gallie <gallie_at_...>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 11:49:09 +0930

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Pinson <chrisp_at_...>
To: 'space-marine_at_...' <space-marine@...>
Date: Monday, November 10, 1997 10:23 AM
Subject: RE: [Epic] Squat 40K List


>Al,
>
>Since I am going to be your regular opponent I would like to say a few
>things.
>
>E40K is about abstraction, that is, overlooking what are superficial
>differences. The support weapons for the squats should be (in my oppinion)
>the same as the Impy Guard and the Marines. Why ?, well they are
>constructed from the same STC template.
><Snip>

I agree with you Chris, to a certain extent. Yes the game is about
abstraction but sometimes these abstractions go too far. ( Maybe its just me
and a historical gaming background or a service background)
While I think the current spt wpn stats fit a Tarantula ( AT ) well I just
don't see them describeing Mole Mortar or Thudd Guns. I think lumping all
the spt wpn into one group is a bit too abstract. Maybe four different stats
is too far the other way but I can see room for two different profiles ( as
marines now have with flak option ). These weapons are very different in
design, operation and most importantly role. If we are going to group them
all together then should we not group all Rhino varients together ( just as
varied in roles, but essentially the same vehicles ) or Rhinos and Chimeras
together as APC's. After rereading the lists I agree the journal list
probably only needs a tweak here and there, mainly in the area of army lists
as opposed to unit summaries.
PS. That Imperitor I told you about on Sat. was gone and the Warlord was
assembled and partly painted so didn't follow up on it.
Cheers
Alun
Ho Ho Ho Its off to War we go !!!!
Received on Mon Nov 10 1997 - 02:19:09 UTC