Re: [Epic] Detachment sizes

From: <anvil_at_...>
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 1998 22:16:32 -0500

L. Brian Hayes wrote:
>
> Just a question on some strategy...
> Is it better to have larger detachments where you can get a high firepower
> when it's time to shot or is it better to use smaller detachments so the
> enemy has to distribute it's firepower(blast markers) between several
> detachments?
> I have one detachment that I've become pretty fond of because it causes so
> much pain to my enemies. It has 10 LR's (1 is the commander) and 5
> Vindicators for soak up. I usually try to maneuver this det into a position
> where I can set them in overwatch and just decimate a enemy detachment.
> Blast markers sometimes make this det not as good as I'd like it to be.
> I'm basically wondering what is everyone's thoughts on this.
>
> "The Riverman" aka. L. Brian Hayes
> haysbo_at_"nospam"net-serv.com
> "What? The rivers up. Sure, I'll run it!"
> "Have Canoe, Will Travel"
> To Reply take out the "nospam"
>
> Name: WINMAIL.DAT
> Part 1.2 Type: unspecified type (application/octet-stream)
> Encoding: x-uuencode



I just got home from a 5000pt game where my opponent had 48!!! land
raiders. I was initially intimidated but managed to overcome this. By
keeping outside his range or line of sight we wittled down those LR's
with war engines (something he didn't have). From my point of view, and
my partners, huge LR detachments can be really cheesey. (sorry RBS). It
could just be me, but I hope not, I get no real satisfaction from
winning a battle by using only "the best" an army has to offer. There is
just no chance for the little guy (the lone tac stand) to rise up and do
something heroic, if he's overshadowed by "monster tanks". If your
approach to this game is "win at all costs" then it's going to be hard
to find people to play. Isn't playing a game supposed to be fun?

anvil
Received on Mon Jan 26 1998 - 03:16:32 UTC