 
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 12 posts ] |
|
objection to point vliue |
|
duz.holger
|
Post subject: objection to point vliue  Posted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 11:11 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 11:50 pm
Posts: 993
Location: denmark
|
|
hi i have and objection to the point valiue. The increes in especially for air transport for space marine is wrong the diferense in the old epic system is due to somthing as simple as commonnes and avaiability
_________________
you must be willing to pay the price for fighting in cities to do battle there
sun tsu the art of war
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
primarch
|
Post subject: objection to point vliue Posted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 11:46 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
|
|
Hi!
I understand this. When this was originally put up for debate it was mentioned and debated.
The problem is air transport is very deadly and effective in the hands of capable players.
The infamous "one turn knockout" by SM using all air transport was a much seen (and cheesy) ploy. Part of the problem was no air defense, but the other was the low cost.
Remember that when you add air transport, you substitute the rhinos ans thus increase the relative breakpoint. This is a huge advantage for troops like the SM.
In the end all playtest data showed that the only fair way to remedy the advantages was to increase the price.
These prices have been in place for over 7 years and have been tested extensively. They seem to work.
Primarch
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
bans
|
Post subject: objection to point vliue Posted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 11:59 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 8:56 pm
Posts: 1113
Location: barcelona
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
primarch
|
Post subject: objection to point vliue Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2006 12:02 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
|
|
Hi!
Yes, they used to be 50 points, way too low.
Primarch
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Enderel
|
Post subject: objection to point vliue Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2006 8:00 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 8:54 pm
Posts: 1134
Location: Southampton - UK
|
| Quote (primarch @ 15 Mar. 2006 (23:02)) | Hi!
Yes, they used to be 50 points, way too low.
Primarch |
I have to agree, I've not played the recent releases of Epic, but I know Epic release 2. It was horrible what you could do with Thunderhawks.
e.g. Imagine the set up, nice Squat Goliath super heavy artillery company with light artillery company around it, protected by thunderers. Two lots of thunderhawks with assault troops over the board in one turn, delivery troops. All artillery dead in one turn, thunderers next turn. Not fun for the opponent, very good for you (especially in the objectives were in that area as well)
_________________
I am become death the destroyer of worlds.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
primarch
|
Post subject: objection to point vliue Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2006 9:38 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
|
|
Hi!
This sort of thing was precisely why it was increased.
I'll go one further, imagine your WHOLE army in T-hawks, drop on ALL objective in turn one, but instead of send assualt troops send devastators, then camp down on first fire... shudder...
Primarch
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Enderel
|
Post subject: objection to point vliue Posted: Thu Mar 16, 2006 11:24 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 8:54 pm
Posts: 1134
Location: Southampton - UK
|
| Quote (primarch @ 16 Mar. 2006 (20:38)) | Hi!
This sort of thing was precisely why it was increased.
I'll go one further, imagine your WHOLE army in T-hawks, drop on ALL objective in turn one, but instead of send assualt troops send devastators, then camp down on first fire... shudder...
Primarch |
LOL that would be amusing.. I was never that bad, but then again I never had the temptation of using that many thunderhawks as I didn't own that many!
_________________
I am become death the destroyer of worlds.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
duz.holger
|
Post subject: objection to point vliue Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2006 1:25 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 11:50 pm
Posts: 993
Location: denmark
|
|
maby the t-hawks is right but drop pods is inherently inprecis and there is so bloody commen that every body has them even chaos and the orbital landing craft is a big gambel a thunderer detachment on first fire order is simple odds cabebel of downing the thing easy and with a price tag of 300 point its a bad investment
_________________
you must be willing to pay the price for fighting in cities to do battle there
sun tsu the art of war
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
duz.holger
|
Post subject: objection to point vliue Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2006 1:26 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 11:50 pm
Posts: 993
Location: denmark
|
|
and a thundere detathment is also cabebel of dovning 3 t-hawks by odds
_________________
you must be willing to pay the price for fighting in cities to do battle there
sun tsu the art of war
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
primarch
|
Post subject: objection to point vliue Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2006 1:55 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
|
| Quote (duz.holger @ 25 Mar. 2006 (19:25)) | | maby the t-hawks is right but drop pods is inherently inprecis and there is so bloody commen that every body has them even chaos and the orbital landing craft is a big gambel a thunderer detachment on first fire order is simple odds cabebel of downing the thing easy and with a price tag of 300 point its a bad investment |
Hi!
Not really. You can do the drop pod "rush. Using it on two or even three full companies.
Remember that deathwind lands first and clears the area, it hits on 4+. That alone can inflict heavy damage. Imagine that by three times!
Also, any pod that lands on somethings gets hit with a hefty negative armor penalty. Also add support plasma cannons with a -2 and if they hit side or rear armor its even worse.
Also with the loss of transports break point gets better too.
Do an even dirtier trick and land DEVASTATORS in these pods. Imagine shooting every thing from behind with 2 dice each!!
Beleive me, its high cost is to reflect its sometimes devastating effect.
Free is too good for this card.
Primarch
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Legion 4
|
Post subject: objection to point vliue Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:31 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 36949
Location: Ohio - USA
|
Yes, we still use Support Pods with Heavy Weapon and the Deathwind of course and "P" said ... they go in first ! And I usually load up Dev. Dets in my Pods too. Bring in Drop Pods, Drop Ships, T-hawks, CAS and OWP Support ... that is a real air assault force ! 
_________________
Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
primarch
|
Post subject: objection to point vliue Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:07 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA
|
|
Hi!
I've seen too many one turn knoickouts with marines in the original SM2 rules. Cheap thunderhawks and free drop pods was just too much. It needed to be brought down a notch or two.
Primarch
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 12 posts ] |
|
