Scott Shupe wrote:
>
> Andy Skinner wrote:
> > Sorry, I don't remember this at all. What is Alan's method?
>
> That you apply the BM loss per detachment being fired
> at. So if you have a Shadowsword with 1 BM, another detachment
> coming into range of the FP guns doesn't make the tank suddenly
> able to shoot its volcano cannon at a detachment further away.
> At least, I think that was Alan's idea and not someone else's.
Yep, correct on all counts.
> Of course, that makes BMs even more powerful than they
> already are, and the disrupt weapons are underpriced as it is...
You're probably correct, at least in some areas. The Ork disrupt is
probably underpriced. The Bugs one is possibly underpriced. The Eldar
Wave Serpent OTOH doesn't appear to be underpriced(to me anyway).
> But I don't see how they could perceive the need to make all
> AT-bearing vehicles more expensive and leave the disrupt units
> as is. And, while I always thought that WEs were somewhat
> overpriced for what you got, giving them new crit tables AND
> giving them the ability to have real orders without adjusting
> their price seems like a mistake. Kinda like what GW did to
> titans in TL.
Time to get playtesting.
--
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 Sun Sep 13 1998 - 04:47:42 UTC