Re: [Epic] [E40K] Squats -- After Review:

From: Aaron P Teske <Mithramuse+_at_...>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 19:07:28 -0400 (EDT)

Excerpts from Epic: 10-Jun-97 Re: [Epic] [E40K] Squats --.. by David
Lado_at_...
> I would actually go the other way. Give the squats only an empty
> leviathin chasis (same as normal leviathin minus megacannon).
>
> The squat player can them spend some amount of points (about 25pts)
> to fit any 3 of the following weapons:
[snip]
> This would allow the squat player to customize what ever kind of vehicle
> he wants.

Um... I think that's exactly what GW was trying to avoid when they cut
down on the number of Titan weapons (tho they went a bit *too* far IMO).
 This kind of thing would be really nice as a varient in 2nd edition,
though. But I don't think it's that appropriate in E40K... and besides,
as someone else pointed out, making it clear what you have would be a
pain.

[snip]
> I think he means thunderers have 2 fp. I think this is the best option
> since it is simpler and more consistant with the other heavies. Also,
> as someone else pointed out, thunderers in SM/TL have identical shooting
> stats as thunderers and a fp of 2 in e40k.

Um... sure. (You mean Dark Reapers, maybe? I'm not sure....) Anyway,
I've altered my list to give Thunderers +Hvy Weapons at +7 points a pop.

> >> Issues that haven't been resolved/discussed at all:
> >> 1) Specific stats for:
> >> - gyrocopter (see above)
> >> - Thunderfire Cannon
> >> - Thudd Gun/Light artillery (barrage vs. 2 FP)
> >> - Goliath (Hvy. Barrage vs. Mega-Cannon)
>
> How bout:
> speed Range FP Assault Armour Special
> gyrocoptor 40 30 3 1 4+ Skimmer

5+ armour, IMO. (And Alan's.) The only thing we hadn't agreed on for
the 'copter was whether it would be a flyer or a skimmer.

The 5+ armour is justified, IMO, since the only vehicle-class units out
there with less than 5+ armour are bikes and, oddly, the Doom Wing.

> Thunderfire 10 45 3 0 5+ Flak

I still think 60cm on the TFC is justified, seeing as it had the longest
range gun out of all the anti-flyer units barring the Magna-Cannon. I'd
also reduce the spped on the thing to either 5 cm or, IMO preferably, 0
cm. They can appear on the edge of the board when they come in as
reserves, wheere they spend the next turn getting hammered into the
ground.

> Thudd Gun 10 45 2* 0 4+ Artillery
>
> * I like giving them fp instead of a barrage, since a barrage is for
> heavy artillery, and I don't think thudd guns qualify as heavy arty.
> Mole mortars would also fall into this category (I would lump them
> together as "field artillery")

Yup, Thudd Guns and Mole Mortars go well together... I'm still not sure
why GW didn't seperate them. As for FP vs. a barrage... keep in mind
that you can get similar SHW-equipped support weapons, so there's really
nothing against putting a barrage where (IMO) it should be. Since the
range is so short, they're not competing with the IG artillery, so....

> Goliath 10 90 mega-cannon 0 5+ Artillery

The gun should be 45-125 cm, really.

> >> - Tunnelers (as in 1st or 2nd edition Epic?)
>
> >Instead of 1st ed secret moves for tunnelers the models are placed on
> >the table by themselves (subterranean) or on their carrier (aboveground)
> >as per the scenario. A carrier on special orders may launch it's
> >tunneler, which is given separate orders.
>
> If you want to make tunnelers distinct from drop pods, this is how I
> would do it. It is simple and requires a minimum of special rules.
> To further simplify them, I would say the carrier remains off board
> and the tunnelers always enter as reserves (like drop pods).

This is OK, though unless you let the tunnelers move *really* quickly
(ie march move while underground, which seems a bit fast) they should
get a couple of turns' of movement before a game begins, assuming it's a
set battle and not an ambush. Or just give them the Infiltration
special ability, or make it an intrinsic to the "tunneler" special.

> Actually, I would prefer the drop pod method, since it is simpler
> still, and requires no new rules.

My main problem with this is that it's *too* random. Tunnelers
shouldn't be quite *that* blind; just pay attention to how fast you're
going for how long, for a rough estimate, or there's intertial guidance
and maybe some others.

                    Aaron Teske
                    Mithramuse+_at_...
Received on Tue Jun 10 1997 - 23:07:28 UTC