Brett Hollindale wrote:
> That doesn't sound too bad, but remember that I was only commenting on a
> post complaining about the lack of usefulness of objectives and the
> cheesiness of massed disrupt weapons...
Basically until everyone's had more experience with the game, such posts
will come up, just the way that "Close Combat is God" came up in SM2.
> I haven't collected the reams of problems that others have writen about
> (because it doesn't matter to me - I'm a heretic...) but there have been
> heaps, haven't there?
Not as such. Re rules: How do BMs work vs SHWs. Passing. Big units (DNs
etc) in transports. Re Units: Pulsars. Ork Speedsters with Death Rays -
do they get 1 FP as well? Some points values for command groups.
Compare this with, say,
Doomweavers vs Titans with Shields, what is an "immobilised Titan", How
do pop-ups work, what's the correct cost of a Rough Rider co, what
weapons can be on a Gargant and where, what Chaos cards are played in
the Psychic phase, the Psychic Phase itself (ggod or bad), etc etc See
the differences between NetEpic and SM2 for what I mean.
What ahppens when an SM2 Wave Serpent hits an SM2 Ork Dragsta? What
happens when an SM2 Wave Serpent hits an SM2 Trygon (or vice versa?)
I think you get my drift.
> > A Hellbore?
>
> Don't have one - have never seen one...
and at 1000 pts for a weapon that has a good chance of evaporating if
used, hangs around for a turn before the troops can disembark, and has
no ranged weaponry, you won't!
> >After
> >the initial 'jockeying for firing position' , all that was left was a
> >heap of die-rolling, followed by a round of Close Combat, with the
> >winner of the Initiative having a huge advantage.
>
> Yeah, it's a lot like chess really. After the initial jockeying for
> possition all that's left is for someone to recognise an untenable position
> and resign.
Oh I agree. This initial jockeying for position was fun, and with 2 good
players, could last awhile. In chess of course, it corresponds with the
mid-game. Anyway, my point is that E40K and SM2 both have this: but E40K
has a lot more: the firefight too-ing and fro-ing, the surrounding of
temporarily retreating units that can eliminate them, the exact
manouvers when you get into the 45cm Range Of Decision.
> And, as we all know, the winner of the only initiative roll
> (who gets white) has a huge advantage...
Agro, I think you may want to retract this part... In SM2, initiative
was a vast advantage. If you had skimmers, then the advantage was
greatly magnified.
> I'll have to take your word for that (I wasn't around that long ago - was
> there even an internet then?) but if there were more FAQ's in those days
> than I've seen on this list - there must have been a s#!tload...
There were. I believe there's a website with the FAQs that were
"officially" answered by AC/JJ for SM2, just as a result of this list.
WD 178 (?) had a few others.
> >Not in E40K. Don't let the (relative) simplicity of the Units blind you
> >to the fact that the game system is actually more complex, and richer
> >than the SM2 basic game mechanics.
>
> Actually, I see that as a drawback. I like simple mechanics and I like
> flavoursome units.
But when the flavour of the units is entirely due to new rules 'just for
them' you just make the whole thing a mess. As for flavour - What is the
essential difference in SM2 between, say, a Bowelburna and a Scorcher?
> >A bunch of Ork Boyz vs a bunch of
> >vanilla Space Marines now involves real forethought on both sides.
> >Agro, one day you and I are going to have to have a few games together.
> Yeah, I'm still keen.
The above example is a pretty good one. I think that you'll agree that
in SM2, this would be a fairly ho-hum exercise. Who gets initiative, who
fires first, do I advance into range or just stay on First Fire and hope
he does, etc.
--
aebrain_at_... <> <> How doth the little Crocodile
| Alan & Carmel Brain| xxxxx Improve his shining tail?
| Canberra Australia | xxxxxHxHxxxxxx _MMMMMMMMM_MMMMMMMMM
abrain_at_... o OO*O^^^^O*OO o oo oo oo oo
By pulling MAERKLIN Wagons, in 1/220 Scale
Received on Thu Nov 20 1997 - 22:19:31 UTC