Re: [Epic] Tempests - tanks, or just good anchors?

From: <duckrvr_at_...>
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 12:07:31 -0600

At 05:38 PM 4/2/97 +0200, you wrote:

>No. I already mentioned this in the post about Eldar tactics, but we seem
>to have completely different approaches to the game. To me, EPIC is
>dominated by long range fire. CC and short range fire (= less than 75 cm)
>are far less important and are, after all, limited to special circumstances
>(yes, I _mean_ it). Average range being 75 cm for most armies, anything
>firing over 75 cm is a good deal, because it means that you will be firing
>before most opponents could reply. You don't need "extra range" against the
>Squats: you need "extra range" in every situation.

This is what I don't understand. It must be a group style of play. It is
largely agreed (on this list) that there is far too much emphasis on the
effectiveness of cc in Epic. The fact that no one in your group has learned
to exploit this aspect of the game is causing most of our disagreement, it
seems.

>Falcons' save is 3+, not 4+. This is good for Falcons, isn't it?

Probably, its' been a while.

>Didn't hear about barrage templates with 100/150 cm range and 0 save mod?
>Plenty of them in IG/SM/Squats armies. So, where a Falcon will have a 2-
>chance of being destroyed, a Tempest will not even require a die roll.
>Believe me, I saw many Falcons killed by Thudd Guns, Whirlinds and the
>like... A Tempest, never, simply because it is immune to "light shots". So
>a Squat artillery company is useless against Tempests and dangerous against
>Falcons (just an example)...

I know you aren't taking IG rocket companies (they suck), and if you are so
concerned about range, then why are you taking the shorter range thud guns
instead of longer range artillery? Apparently I'm missing something . . .

>Multiple Detachments? 4 instead of 6, OK. And then? Do you charge across
>the table with your Tempests and your Falcons?

6 detachments instead of 2. No, I dont charge, I merely pinted out that I
could if necessary.

> You have to
>choose. Flexibility is potential (e.g. before the battle), not a permanent
>asset (e.g. during the battle).

I disagree. Flexibility is absolutely necesary during a battle. On the
final turn, when everyone is charging for objective points, then . . .




Wait a minute. If you play huge battle where most of the victory points
come from units, that would explain why you are so hip on firepower and not
on maneuver or close combat. You are probably right in those situations,
but the other factors are much more inportant in a 3-6k game. So you
probably arent' charging objectives, or trying to hold them when someone
else is.

And it only took me writing a small book for the light to dawn.

Later,
Temp
Received on Wed Apr 02 1997 - 18:07:31 UTC