RE: [Epic] "FIREPOWER" and Blast Markers

From: Crocker, Cyril <ccrocker_at_...>
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 08:04:09 -0400

1 Disrupt weapon has a 50% chance of placing 2 blast markers as it is a
SHW as well.

-----Original Message-----
From: J Andrew Evans [mailto:J_Andrew_Evans_at_...]
Sent: Sunday, September 13, 1998 4:04 AM
To: space-marine_at_...
Subject: Re: [Epic] "FIREPOWER" and Blast Markers


Two things.

Firstly, in FIREPOWER it is Super-heavy tanks that are offered a new
critical
table, not all WEs. The new orders apply to WEs which therefore
includes
Super-heavy tanks and Titans.

Secondly, why are disrupt weapons so good? When any one weapon fires
there is
only a 50% chance (4+) of it placing 1 BMs. It seems to me that you
need rank
on rank of Disrupt weapons in order to have any effect. Do this however
(despite the expense of buying them) and you use up a lots of points on
a
weapons that is only partially successfully. Good old, natural,
firepower in
reasonable numbers places a nicely satisfactory numbers of BMs. Add
SHWs and
the numbers stack up very nicely.

Can someone explain this fascination with Disrupt weapons. What are the
tactics
that I'm missing?

Waiting with bated breath for my preconceptions to be disrupted :)

A#

Alan E & Carmel J Brain wrote:

> > Of course, that makes BMs even more powerful than they
> > already are, and the disrupt weapons are underpriced as it is...
>
> > 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.
Received on Mon Sep 14 1998 - 12:04:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:10:52 UTC