RE: [Epic] Transport units

From: David Lado <lado_at_...>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 15:07:10 -0400 (EDT)

>>Hey, I hope you're the only one who see it !
>>Very good question, sir. So, you'll have to take always 2
>>detachment. Mais, �a n'est pas dans l'esprit des
>>concepteurs d'EPIC (I think so..).
>
>I don't believe that the Epic designers thought about this problem...
>It doesn't matter, the Erik solution is the best and I will use it:
>give the same order to the 2 detachments (ie if the transported
>detachment is in assault then the transport detachment should be in
>assault to be abble to carry it, etc...)

I hardly think they missed the possibility especially since they
mention it in the rules. I would see how the rule plays out
before making a house rule to "fix" it. It might well be that
units hurled injudiciously forward on marching transports will
find themselves in middle of the enemy army with no support.
Even if the enemy units are on assault orders, they can still
place the normal number of BMs on a unit in range, and it wouldn't
take alot of blast markers to paralyze the assault unit (and
the it's in for a world of hurt). Also, putting the transports
on march orders will leave them more than half-way across the
board, unable to fire, unable to move in the assault phase,
probobly without support, and within assault range of all but
the slowest units (and perhaps them as well). So you might
well end up sacrificing a unit of value equal to the one you
kill. Also, there is no guarentee that you will win the
assault phase initiative, so you might well find your assault
troops are themselves swarmed under in the assault phase.

I think it's an interesting tactic, and one that could work once
or twice against someone who doesn't expect it. But I think it
might also be very risky. It is much more likely to work against
an isolated flanking unit rather than a unit in the main force,
and thus have limited yields for a sizable commitment of troops.
I don't think it qualifies as an unstoppable tactic, or even a
difficult to stop tactic, and I would wait to see how it plays
out to decide if it's even a good tactic.

Also, there are applications of transport detachments that
don't yield such strange results. For example, I don't see
anything wrong with a detachment of landraiders on regular orders
transporting a detachment of assault troops on assault orders.
This gives the assault troops a modest 10 cm boost to their move
and lets the raiders be in a position to soften up the target
detachment before the assault. Also, this rule doesn't really
benifit any army more than another. The only army that can't
put together a superfast assault force are the orks, but they
can take advantage of the rule in other ways (ways that could
counter the superfast detatchment).

David
Received on Wed Jul 16 1997 - 19:07:10 UTC