Re: [Epic] Guard tactics

From: Scott Shupe <shupes_at_...>
Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 17:49:16 -0400

Sean Smith wrote:
>
> > Due to the speed of my current connection, I've deliberately
> > chosen not to list the *bad* parts of fielding a 45 Sentinel
> > detachment. But I'm not claiming that the Sentinel is the solution to
> > all IG problems, just a good unit to use as a basic trooper.
>
> As far as I can see in the rules sentinels are treated as cavalry,

        Well, they're vehicles, but same thing terrain-wise.

> this
> means they can't enter buildings and fortfications; and treat ruins, rubble
> and woods as dangerous, where as infantry treat these all as no effect.
> This the first disadvantage I see Sentinels have. Their second disadvantage is
> that point for point charging cavalry have 160% more assault value i.e
> 30 points of charging rough riders have an assault value of 6 vs 3.75
> for sentinels. Also rough riders charging have the same armour.
> The only thing going for sentinels is there numbers and firepower; but
> heavy weapon IG troops have more fire power, greater range and can occupy
> terrain that sentinels can't assault (the same as marine devastors).
> Overall I would use rough riders instead of sentinels, because of
> the rough riders higher assualt value, point for point.

        Don't compare the sentinels to Rough Riders, compare
them to standard IG. Of course the RRs have a higher assault,
but they also cannot shoot for all practical purposes (and the
sentinels can).

        I think the Sentinels' only big disadvantage is being
a vehicle. Well, that, and being only available as support.

Scott
shupes_at_...
Received on Thu Jun 05 1997 - 21:49:16 UTC