Re: [Epic] IG/TL vs Space Wolves
> At 09:34 AM 4/9/97 +0100, you wrote:
> >10 Imperial Bike Companies (3000 points)
> >1 Reaver battlegroup with: (1000 points)
> > - 2 Reavers with Warp missile, Quake Cannon, Gatling Blaster
> > - 1 Reaver with Combat head, Warp missile, Chain Saw and Power Ram
> Survey says . . . X, bad answer
> Definite cheese factor present.
I think these special situations are interesting for a one shot game. I
enjoy the simulation aspects of wargaming. You can create what if
scenarios for WW2 armor battles where the force composition does not
match any TOE. In fact, most people play their WW2 micro armor using the
best tanks available even though they were rare.
The battle force listed above is simliar in concept. If I had these
forces available in a much larger army, I might have skimmed the bike
companies off their regimental commands and grouped them for a quick
flanking strike. I might even have assigned the Reaver group as support
for this unit. Strategy like this can be found in the American Civil War
by Jeb Stuart's cavlary under R.E. Lee's command.
I think the cheese found in the characters with game swaying powers
(Gaz_at_#$% the orc Warlord) or the almost unkillable unit (Dominatrix)
more than in the massing of support units. After all, that is just
making the best use of what is available. I would categorize that as
thinking. I know, we aren't suppose to do that in GW games, but
occassionally some wise guy slips in and does it. George Washington made
use of terrain and ambush in age when that was considered "unfair".
Montgomery and Wavell before him used massed bomber attacks, called
"carpet bombing", to overcome Rommel in the dessert. Their armor was
inferior on a tank to tank basis, so they tried a different approach.
This from the most methodical and conventional army of the era.
No, I have to disagree with the idea that this is a cheesy OOB.
Received on Thu Apr 10 1997 - 15:57:43 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:09:18 UTC