Re: [Epic] 40K/IG infantry Detachments

From: M. Edward Davis <mediii_at_...>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 12:37:32 -0600 (MDT)

On Thu, 24 Apr 1997 duckrvr_at_... wrote:

> At 07:23 PM 4/23/97 -0600, you wrote:
>
> >> IG Heavy Co. SM Devastator Co.
> >> 3 X Command squads 96 points 5 Devastator Squads 200 points
> >> 9 X Heavy squads 126 points Make one an HQ 25 points
> >> total points 222 total points 225
> >> FP at range 45: 18 FP at range 45: 20
> >> FP at range 30: 21
> >>
> >
> >Well, the IG DO get 12 stands, which means they have to loose a lot more
> >stands. They still have more stands even if you double the # of SM stands
> >via armour difference. Also, clogging the board comes in handy.
>
> A devastator squad is 2 stands, so that's 10 stands total, not 5.
>
> >While GW did make the armies closer to each other with this version, each
> >still have their own personality.
>
> That's fine. I don't have a problem with certain armies not having certain
> units, or even paying a little more for units with the same abilities,
> especially if they have limited access to them. For example, in 2nd
> edition, Orks had very few barrage templates, and had to buy expensive units
> to acquire them. That was fine. However, the IG just sucks compared to
> Marines. Again, that would be fine if you really could swarm the board with
> hordes of troops, but you can't because they cost too much.

You can, but they just can't be quality troops. With normal marines vs
normal IG, you can get 4 stands of IG (28pts) vs 2 stands of SM (30pts).
But, yes, the IG inf aren't as heavily armed or armored as the SM
(surprise). No one has a tank that's close to the Leman Russ (the LR is
close) and the Demolisher is better than the Vindicator.

>
> Temp
>
                                        Ed "Overload" Davis
                                        mediii_at_...
                                        med4386_at_...
Received on Thu Apr 24 1997 - 18:37:32 UTC