Re: [Epic] Overwatch and Some Random Comments

From: Scott Shupe <shupes_at_...>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 12:58:56 -0500

John Chapman wrote:
>
> > * Spending points on ground attack air power is a waste. Take enough
> > interceptors to cover your butt and spend the rest on ground troops.
> > Air power in general doesn't get enough time on the board to justify
> > bringing anything more.
>
> Hmmmmmm take enough interceptors to cover your bombers and then pick
> your target every second turn. Ok bombers are only there for say 2 turns in most
> games but they can usually get where its needed. POint for point they usually
> pack more firepower than most ground units (makes up for their infrequent
> appearance a bit) and also (if youre not playing the flyer rules in the WD)
> they are a very hard unit to get VPs out of. Driving them off is easy -

        Exactly my point. Driving off anything (with the possible
exception of Thunderhawks) is fairly easy, meaning all the points
your opponent spent on bombers is effectively wasted (assuming you
have enough interceptors to get rid of them).

> > * Large detachment of termies and LRs, on overwatch, with no nearby
> > cover for assault detachments to sneak through. With the termies
> > in the front to absorb hits (damn Save ability). Not a pleasant sight.
> > The only good answer to this is: make it come to you, and pound it
> > with as many 60cm+ weapons as you can muster. Too bad that's not what
>
> Ummm how bout you try using some anti tank shots on them. Dont SHWs like
> AT shot let you choose the Land Raiders over the termies? (Or have we been
> playing it wrong?).

        No but the problem is - termies & LRs on OW. In order to
shoot him with my LRs, I have to move my LRs in on non-OW orders
and hope I win init for the shooting phase. I lost the init the
first turn and got kinda torn up, and screwed up the second turn
by not firing my remaining LRs first thing.

> > I did... I foolishly thought I could take something like this on, and
> > watched half my army get grounded into chuck as a result. Very
> > painful. Erik, you really should nickname that detachment the "Meat
> > Grinder" - but don't think my bezerkers and daemons are going to
> > charge headlong into it next time around...
>
> I dont know. Charge in some Bloodthirsters. Rampage means youll kill
> what you assault. 10 Assault means , with a maximum of 2 units ganging up on
> you its damn near impossible for many armies to actually have a higher
> assault value. You have save too, youll charge further than they shoot. Even
> if you lose the CC (and your thirsters) you still have a good chance of
> killing stuff.....Ive always wondered who come out on top of the Thirster/LR
> match up - Id favour the Bloodthirsters - maybe Im wrong.

        Well, yeah, but that's what the termies were there for.
The Baneblade and Warlord titan (RIP Reaper II) sitting in the
middle of the detachment didn't help either. =)

        The detachment was hardly unbeatable, it just looks scary.
Plus I dealt with it in a very stupid and bezerker-like fashion, in
addition to making a few foolish mistakes.

Scott Shupe
shupes_at_... shupes@... http://www.rpi.edu/~shupes
***********************************************************************
"Who's laughing now?" - Evil Dead II
Received on Wed Nov 12 1997 - 17:58:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:10:02 UTC