Thane Morgan wrote:
>
> > As a final point with reguard to initiative/CC/FFs and a suggestion
> > (made by you????-well someone) that all movement should take place before
> > CC and FFs are worked out - well it could work but you may want to rethink
> > the points of a lot of units if you do. The only best defense we've found
> > against Greater Demon Dets so far is go first , Firefight them and break them
> > so they cant CC you that turn. Without the possibility of this dont you think
> > their incredible CC abilities coupled with low vulnerability to being shot
> > may make them woth more than the 25-30 points they cost?......
>
> Not really. Comparing them to terminators, they move faster and have +1
> assault, but have no range, rapid fire, stubborn and are at -1 armor.
He was talking about greater daemons, not lessers. The GDs
are substantially more powerful than your average termie.
> Actually, this has raised a question amongst our group abou the chaos
> list. Why are chaos space marines of a higher point cost than Imp. Space
> Marines, even though they don't have stubborn?
Same point cost, but they don't get stubborn. Effectively,
the loyal SMs get Stubborn for free. Who said GW doesn't favor the
imperials? =)
> Also noise marines 21 per
> stand, devestators 20 per stand?
20 points + 1 for Stubborn.
> They did reduce the points for lack of
> stubborn in chaos terminators.
No they didn't. Your basic chaos termie costs the same as
a SM termie, but the chaos version doesn't get Stubborn. If you try
to give the chaos termie stubborn, it costs you 2 points instead of
1 (see the NM and TS upgrades).
> Finally, why the low assault values for slaneesh titans?
Probably for the same reason they had a low CAF in SM/TL.
There is a mistake with the Slaanesh titans, though - it looks
like the point cost for the Subs and Questors got reversed.
> Why are the
> silver towers so weak in firepower?
What does it matter? They're fairly priced for their
stats. At least they're somewhat useful now. They sure weren't
in SM/TL.
> Why don't greater demons have
> multiple wounds, to better reflect 40K abilities?
I think that's because doing so would require too many
special rules. Only WEs have multiple wounds, and GDs don't really
fit into that category.
> I know that the points
> are more or less equal to their abilities, but I thought they were
> trying to make Epic units more on the order of 40K units.
Well sure, but there's also the problem of trying to do
that while still keeping the system fairly abstract.
Scott Shupe
shupes_at_... shupes@...
http://www.rpi.edu/~shupes
***********************************************************************
"Ia! Ia! Cthulgu fhtagn!"
Received on Mon Dec 08 1997 - 18:16:16 UTC