Re: [Epic] Chaos in E40k?

From: Richard Dewsbery <dewsbery_at_...>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 1997 10:52:59 +0100

Peter Andersson II wrote:
>
> I'm back on the list and have only caught the tail end of the
> E40k discussion. I've managed to pick up that there are rules
> for Orks, Eldar, SM and bugs. And no rules for squats. Correct?
> What I want to know, before I spend a lot of cash, is: are there
> rules for chaos?

Yep

> And what do the chaos generals on the list think about chaos in
> E40k? Is chaos a worse proposition than ever, about the same, or
> an improvement?

DK - never having used chaos under the old rules.
>
> I suppose it's kind of middle of the road since nobody is screaming
> CHEESE or SUCKS.

GW insists that, even allowing for "flavour" from 1 army to another,
there is no cheese and nothing sucks - everything is finely balanced.

Although they would be unusual games publishers if they said "Yes, the
super heavy cavalry is in fact worth far more than the points it costs,
radically overbalances the game and we made a booboo."
>
> >From what little I've read it seems you can move troops further
> while sacrificing firepower, something that should benefit chaos
> since they can't shoot anyway.

Well, there are always the marines (the new miniatures look pretty
good).

> Emphasising assault combat sounds like it should be right up the
> chaos alley too. Or...?
> On the other hand, being pinned down by blast markers doesn't
> sound like fun for cahos. Better than dying I suppose. Like they
> used to do.

Richard
Received on Tue Apr 01 1997 - 09:52:59 UTC