duckrvr_at_... wrote:
>
> At 11:25 AM 6/4/97 +0100, you wrote:
>
> >yo=
u missed my point
> >what they were talking about was allies
>
> >BTW haven=
't got books to hand
> >but how do Cultists compare with IG ?
The chaos a=
rmy list is up on my E40k page, you can check
out the cultist stuff there. =
Basically, a cultist detachment is
a lot like an IG infantry detachment - =
tanks & whatnots are only
available as support, so you have to take a bunch=
of infantry to
take any of the good stuff. Can't take IG arty, and Chimer=
as are
only available as Support (ie there's no option to mount cultists
in=
a Chimera) so making mechanized cultist detachments isn't easy.
> They ar=
e stright up the same, except for the organization, and a handful of
> unit=
s. My point was, that if you could take IG as allies, it would
> invalidat=
e that entire portion of the army. Who would take cultist when you
> can g=
et a better TOE using IG units? Not to mention the fact that you could
> t=
ake an all CSM force to get your 5 strategy, and reinforce them with
> Impe=
rial titans or IG artillery. Basically, I think it would ruin the
> flavor=
AND be cheesy.
Does the armies book mention what happens Strategy
Rating=
wise when it comes to allies? What would the SR be
of, say, IG allied wit=
h Eldar?
[James Nugent] I don't think it mentions it anywhere, but probab=
ly 4, since Eldar have the same rating as marines, but then maybe less, sin=
ce I don't think eldar and IG would work as well together as IG and Marines=
. What it seems they did was they took the average of the two ratings and r=
ounded up. 5+2=7/2=3.5=4. Oh well.
-James
- application/ms-tnef attachment: stored
Received on Thu Jun 05 1997 - 11:37:01 UTC