Allen,
I have been using the simple method (using main force units in supp=
ort slots).
I agree with what you say about detachments blowing out, and I=
admit that I haven't been trying to cheese out when I play, but I find thi=
s option to be the best.
I think if you are going to use the massive detac=
hment (3 command, 18 tactical squads, 21 chimera) then you will get the tru=
e feel of the guard .... large bodies of men, difficulties in effective use=
, sledgehammer like effect.
It allows useful detachments to be made withou=
t altering the rules or creating a 'new' detachment.
After all, the guard =
is about numbers not precision.
Cheers.
My own feeling about the "simple"=
idea is taht it is great on the short end.
With a single command squad you=
can have up to 12 infantry stands and their
transport. This eases your ab=
ility to play the Guard the way the background,
rules, and WD articles sugg=
est you should; as cheap and numerous troops.
(As opposed to the current de=
tachement where you can play as cheap or
numerous, but not both.) It also =
helps you build larger infantry detachments
that actually cost what they ar=
e worth rather than having an extra 25 point
surcharge thrown in. However,=
it still bugs me that this sidesteps the
problem rather than eliminating i=
t. I also wonder about the possibility
of the large end: 3 command stands=
, 36 infantry stands, and 20 Chimeras.
Is this, perhaps, just a bit much, o=
r is it just big and clumsy? Does it
cost what it is worth? Too much ? T=
oo little?
At the moment, Jervis is interested in seeing ideas for optiona=
l rules and
tactics so these detachments should stand a better than nil cha=
nce of seeing
print if they are well designed. I'd just hate to get them p=
rinted and have
the gaming community at large respond with, "What is this c=
heese?"
- application/ms-tnef attachment: stored
Received on Wed Apr 08 1998 - 05:34:05 UTC