On Fri, 25 Apr 1997, Scott Shupe wrote:
> > *Note: Knights count as Walkers using the optional rule (p.104 Battle) if
> > your group is so inclined.*
> 
> 	These guys ain't dreadnoughts, they're much larger.
> I always thought the 2ed knight models were roughly to scale
> with the vehicles/titans (unlike GDs and HTs, which were 
> based the same as the knights but really about the size of 
> a dread).
The way I'm looking at it would be just count as Infantry for rough
terrain, no 2x Assault Move, no armor bonus for terrain, just movement.
Sorry that was unclear.
> > The Lancer went up to 10 points higher than the Paladin to act as a
> > deterrant or there'd be no reason to take Paladins.  I think the 10
> > points might be worth the increased move and Close Support.  Playtesting
> > will tell.
> 
> 	Shouldn't the Lancers have a lower Assault than 
> the paladins?  In 2ed they could be nasty at short ranges 
> but were piss-poor when it came to close combat (making 
> them pretty useless IMHO, but that's besides the point).
Although in 2nd ed. they did have half the CAF, the Power Lance could be
used before base-to-base combat, that's why I equalled out the AV, but I
mihgt change it on the basis of your argument.
> 	Personally I would have given the Paladins 1 AT
> shot instead of 2 FP.
Personally I think there's enough Imperial SHW out there already. :)
Seriously though if you take a look at 2nd ed. the battlecannon is
identical to the Falcon lascannon... Falcons have 2FP in e40k, so do
Paladins.  
 
> 	Why the high assault value on Errants?
Errants have the thermal cannon, a short range kickass weapon, also there
was a need for a Knight in the Assault role, so I chose the Errant.
> 	What about using Death Rays on the heavy knights;
> the Crusaders did have volcano cannons.  Or is that too
> powerful?
Nope they didn't... Castellans and Crusaders had Quake cannons as the
primary weapon.  Secondary weapons were lascannon for the Crusader and
autocannon for the Castellan.  I didn't want any secondary weapons to keep
the points valu down.  (And I don't think any non War Engines should have
more than one weapon system.)
Thanks for the comments.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul R. Tobia 	    	   				   _O_
"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon  	    |
full of tapes hurtling down the highway." (Tanenbaum,1996)  
ptobia_at_...              
http://falcon.cc.ukans.edu/~heresy
Received on Fri Apr 25 1997 - 22:27:35 UTC