Re: [Epic] [E40k] Thoughts & Questions

From: Scott Shupe <shupes_at_...>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 11:23:16 -0400

James Flowers wrote:
>
> > 1) War Engines - why? The titans seem to be even more overpriced
> > than they were in SM. 490 pts for a slow, unmaneuverable, very
> > fragile Reaver? I don't think so. As near as I can figure, their
> > only place is to get rid of other war machines (with death rays).
> > Smaller SHVs might be worth it, I'm not sure.
>
> Try 390 points for a Reaver...

        Oops, I was thinking of the cost of the Dom. Still
too much, IMHO.

> And as for slow and unmaneuverable,
> remeember that get a free 45 degree turn and turn further 45 degree
> angles at -5cm off their move. And they move twice - once in the movement
> phase, and once in the assault phase. Throw them onto a road (at +5cm
> speed) and they can shunt around the battlefield quite nicely. And that's
> just the basic 15cm move War Engines!

        And that's pretty damn slow and unmaneuverable,
especially when you have fire arcs to worry about.

> > 2) Close Combat is now god above all other gods. *sigh* On the plus
> > side, bikes are nowhere near as powerful as they were in SM/TL. In
> > fact, their usefulness seems pretty limited now.
>
> They are still useful for quickly gaining objectives, while denying them
> to the enemy, although it pays to keep terrain between you and your
> enemy...

        Ah, objectives are something else I forgot about. All
the games I played were 'meeting engagements' (we wanted to get
a good handle on the rules before trying anything strange). The
way you place objectives (at least 90cm away from where you start)
basically meant that I grabbed my opponent's T&Hs and he grabbed
mine, and neither of us were able to do much about it. Actually,
he had a ravenwing-style bike force that almost got to his rescue
objective, but that got wiped out by my daemon calvary horde.

        I was thinking that the best use for bikes would be to
be a part of an assault det., that could keep up with the infantry
and support it in CC. The bikes look like they're more than fast
enough to do this, even tho they don't get to double their move
in the assault phase. Might also be good for wrapping around the
sides of a force being assaulted, to keep them from running away.

> > Don't get into HtH with the bugs (unavoidable, I know, considering
> > how fast they are). You will die...
>
> Not entirely true. Like all things, and particularly in E40K, careful
> play will get you through. Tyranids are just as susceptible to the
> effects of Blast Markers in combat as anyone else,

        Wow, a +2 to my roll. Doesn't mean much when he's got
3 or 4 times your assault value.

> > 5) I've heard it said more than once that the new rules are simpler
> > than the SM/TL rules. Bullshit. The new rules are far more
> > complicated. OTOH, the units themselves have no special rules (for
> > the most part).
>
> That's purely your opinion. They are definitely simpler than the SM/TL
> rules, IMHO.

        How so? SM/TL rules were very simple - place orders,
roll for init, move armies, shoot armies, kill stuff in CC,
shoot again, determine VPs & make morale checks. There wasn't
anything in the phases themselves that was complicated at all -
moving was simpler, firing was simpler, CC was simpler... The
problems came with vague rules (which this system has also),
and vague special powers on certain units (mostly eldar, of
course =).

> And
> with SM/TL it used to take us 4 hours to deploy and play out just 1 turn
> (which was all most of our games lasted for BTW).

        Either you guys are playing huge games (not all that
fun IMHO) or you're doing something wrong. SM/TL games should
go 3 turns on average, unless you're using lots of points on
each side.

> > 6) I've also heard that games go quicker with the new rules than
> > before. Also bull. Turns don't neccessarily take as long, but the
> > games last for more turns. And picking an army takes CONSIDERABLY
> > longer (especially when you have 2 players and only 1 army book =).
>
> See above comments. IMHO choosing an Army takes less time than in SM/TL.

        I don't even see how that's possible.

> > 7) What's the 'average' game size anyway? It was 5-6000 points in
> > SM/TL, but I'm not sure what it's supposed to be here.
>
> We tried 1500 points to start off with, but have settled on 2000 points
> per side. It provides scope for maneuvering on an 8x4' table, whereas ost
> of our SM/TL battles were pretty much 'cover the board with troops'
> affairs...

        Which would explain why you had such short games I guess...

> > 8) Close Assault vehicles (like the Khorne Engines) are looking pretty
> > bad - that double speed if you can reach CC thing is important. Anyone
> > have a good experience with CC vehicles?
>
> Double speed when entering CC only applies to infantry, not to war
> engines or vehicles. Sorry.

        Perhaps I should have been more clear - CC vehicles look
bad because they CAN'T double speed like infantry, and the doubling
seems fairly important.

> Might even send you some of our House Rules?

        Well, for the most part I put up chaos house rules,
mostly new units and stuff.

Scott
shupes_at_...
Received on Tue Apr 29 1997 - 15:23:16 UTC