RE: [Epic] E40K Squats - LONG!!!

From: Thomas Bloom <tbloom_at_...>
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 01:17:23 -0500

>[James Nugent] . But they ARE better. Each one has a heavy weapon, not
>just some of them.
>And no, I'm not a squat player. The infantry is cool but I think most of
>their vehicles look funny. The 1st ed. White Dwarf squat list was better,
>IMHO.

Dark Reapers have 5 heavy Weapons to a base and have the same stats as any
other heavy troop.

>[James Nugent] I aggree with both sides. However better doesn't seem to
>matter anymore. My Dark Reapers are not better than anyone elses and cost
>more. (In 2ed Dark Reapers and Thunderes were as good as each other,
>except the thunderes were faster for some reason :) Since I can think of
>no troops that have Heavy weapons and Rapid Fire how about you double then
>add the heavy weapons, for a FP of 3 which seems fair( and plausable) to
>me. I'd keep the cost. Eldar pay +10 for Heavy weapons and don't have
>rapid fire, so +12 isn't pretty good.

Rapid Fire doesn't work that way. Rapid Fire doubles your FP on overwatch.
On any other order thunderes would have a 2 FP. Going to Overwatch would
bump it up to 4. Now if Rapid Fire only added one to a units FP on
Overwatch it would be alright. I never did like that it said "double" when
they only wanted to add one to a units FP. (all the units that have Rapid
Fire have a one FP.) I think infantry FP having a "ceiling" of 2 is
alright. Heck, Thudd guns and orc Big Guns only have 2 FP. More FP is
what Field artilery and Tanks are suppost to be for. If infantry could
pack a big a punch as the tanks why have tanks?
Received on Thu Jun 05 1997 - 06:17:23 UTC