Re: [Epic] Net Epic

From: Cameron Bentsen <stu7i95_at_...>
Date: 20 Feb 1997 12:04 EST

In message "[Epic] Net Epic", you write:

> At 04:32 AM 2/20/97 -0500, you wrote:
>
> > Bah. Those are minor problems (to me and most Eldar players,
> >anyways :) The obvious gap is the Warlock Titan Battle Group: 1350
> >points for 1 Warlock Titan and 2 Phantom Titan bodyguards. No, you do
> >not have to shoot at the Phantoms if they happen to be closer.
>
> I like this idea.

Sounds reasonable to me...

>
> > I have to agree... A Warlord Battlegroup should cost the same
> >as 2 Warlords. Banelords and other Chaos-enhanced Titans should not
> >be available in Battlegroup strength, IMHO.
>
> The problem is, 3 chaos titans w/o BGs = 2700 pts. A Warlord BG = 1500 pts.
> Chaos titans are good, but not that good. I might pay 1800 for a Chaos BG,
> but NO WAY am I gonna shell out 2700 pts.
>
> Temp

IF we were to keep the current system, I submit that Chaos should have to pay
900 points for a Warlord and the Imperials 750. This cost increase reflects
the Chaos Warlord's access to titan tails as well as all the chaos weapons.
Furthermore, Chaos battlegroups should be allowed, but worth 1800 points, as
opposed to the Imperials' 1500.

Chaos Reavers, accordingly, should be worth 600 points, and battlegroups 1200.
They would not have access to havoc missle racks, however, for obvious reasons.

Chaos Warhounds should probably remain exactly the same as Imperial ones, since
part of their cost is reflected in their relatively limited weapons selection.
Also, allowing Warhounds to have CC weapons (tails, doomfists, hellblades, etc.)
runs counter to their current weapons limitations.

Cameron Bentsen, Ottawa
Received on Thu Feb 20 1997 - 17:04:00 UTC