Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 3 of 5
  [ 69 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

why this illogical army mixing
primarch
 Post subject: why this illogical army mixing
PostPosted: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:01 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA

(darkangel @ Apr. 14 2007,15:53)
QUOTE

(primarch @ Apr. 14 2007,20:40)
QUOTE
Hi!

So as not to use somewhat loaded terms as "tournament" or "scenario" (I guess only old epic hands can find such terms loaded.... :;): ), I'd leave it as two alternatives:

1. No allies
2. Allies with two forms current and vanvlak table or a meld of both).

This would just need a simple addition and no major changes.

Is everyone on board/okay with this solution?

Primarch

it is ok for me, if my opinion is relevant.

question: what is "vanvlak" :blush:

Hi!

My dear sir, this is netepic...

..... EVERYONE'S opinion is relevant.  :;):

Vanvlak is the screen name of the member who proposed the allies table.

What does his screen name mean? I think he'll answer that since I don't have a clue....  :D

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
darkangel
 Post subject: why this illogical army mixing
PostPosted: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:05 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 12:55 am
Posts: 470
Location: Germany

(Enderel @ Apr. 14 2007,20:40)
QUOTE
I think the morale and break points are different as well? ?Squat troops wouldn't break very quickly and would have excellent morale compared to Ork ones?

but the moral value and the structure of a mob is no argument for the less cost! the ork land raider and marine land raider are built with the same steel and this is reflected in the data sheet. hey, the orks should be happy taking the land raider, yes I know because of some historical stuff. but why could the marine not take the bonebreaker...it is no prblem..I could creat some historical stuff, so it is tracable...sorry, but I hope you know what I mean...the marines ave the land aider and the orks the bonereaker..it is ok...or give the marines the bonebreaker and then the orks could take the land raider...
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
darkangel
 Post subject: why this illogical army mixing
PostPosted: Sat Apr 14, 2007 10:47 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 12:55 am
Posts: 470
Location: Germany

(darkangel @ Apr. 14 2007,21:05)
QUOTE

another question:

how did you generally set the costs of the units?

example: 4 robots = 150 points
              4 dreadnaughts = 100 points

I do not see any further reason for me choosing the robots?! and by the way, the deredeo can move up to 5cm more. ok, the robots armour is btter by 1 but they both use the the weapons...

he reason why i am asking is that the cost value was equal set at 100 points in sm2nd.

Did you change this because of praxis in battle and the robots seems to be more dangerous then dreadnaughts???
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
primarch
 Post subject: why this illogical army mixing
PostPosted: Sun Apr 15, 2007 1:58 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA

(darkangel @ Apr. 14 2007,16:05)
QUOTE

(Enderel @ Apr. 14 2007,20:40)
QUOTE
I think the morale and break points are different as well?  Squat troops wouldn't break very quickly and would have excellent morale compared to Ork ones?

but the moral value and the structure of a mob is no argument for the less cost! the ork land raider and marine land raider are built with the same steel and this is reflected in the data sheet. hey, the orks should be happy taking the land raider, yes I know because of some historical stuff. but why could the marine not take the bonebreaker...it is no prblem..I could creat some historical stuff, so it is tracable...sorry, but I hope you know what I mean...the marines ave the land aider and the orks the bonereaker..it is ok...or give the marines the bonebreaker and then the orks could take the land raider...

Hi!

Actually it is a good argument for the lower cost. Cost is not based solely on unit weapons and armor, but on battlefield function they are different. The ability to roam through the battlefield independently cannot be underestimated. Such a unit can be where you want it, when you need it.

The ork mob structure is VERY restrictive. Redeployment and maneuver are not realistic options for ork strategy (which is more like a sledgehammer). Such restriction diminish the use of a unit, not increase it. Also, add to this that mainly blood axes use it and use is even more restricted. Having used them in an ork force many times over the years I could make a good argument to LOWER the current cost, not increase it. Its just not the greatest of units in an ork force.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
primarch
 Post subject: why this illogical army mixing
PostPosted: Sun Apr 15, 2007 2:02 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 12:46 am
Posts: 27069
Location: Edmond, Oklahoma USA

(darkangel @ Apr. 14 2007,17:47)
QUOTE
[quote="darkangel,Apr. 14 2007,21:05"][/quote]
another question:

how did you generally set the costs of the units?

example: 4 robots = 150 points
              4 dreadnaughts = 100 points

I do not see any further reason for me choosing the robots?! and by the way, the deredeo can move up to 5cm more. ok, the robots armour is btter by 1 but they both use the the weapons...

he reason why i am asking is that the cost value was equal set at 100 points in sm2nd.

Did you change this because of praxis in battle and the robots seems to be more dangerous then dreadnaughts???

Hi!

Good point. This may be an error. Although robots don't have a morale characteristic and are fearless, they do have a restrictive order scheme, so it balances out.

I believe they should be 100 points as well.

Add this to errata to be fixed.

Primarch

_________________
Primarch


The Primarchload
Magnetized Titans Tutorial
Net Epic Gold
Heresy Rules
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
darkangel
 Post subject: why this illogical army mixing
PostPosted: Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:50 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 12:55 am
Posts: 470
Location: Germany

(primarch @ Apr. 15 2007,01:58)
QUOTE

(darkangel @ Apr. 14 2007,16:05)
QUOTE

(Enderel @ Apr. 14 2007,20:40)
QUOTE
I think the morale and break points are different as well? ?Squat troops wouldn't break very quickly and would have excellent morale compared to Ork ones?

but the moral value and the structure of a mob is no argument for the less cost! the ork land raider and marine land raider are built with the same steel and this is reflected in the data sheet. hey, the orks should be happy taking the land raider, yes I know because of some historical stuff. but why could the marine not take the bonebreaker...it is no prblem..I could creat some historical stuff, so it is tracable...sorry, but I hope you know what I mean...the marines ave the land aider and the orks the bonereaker..it is ok...or give the marines the bonebreaker and then the orks could take the land raider...

Hi!

Actually it is a good argument for the lower cost. Cost is not based solely on unit weapons and armor, but on battlefield function they are different. The ability to roam through the battlefield independently cannot be underestimated. Such a unit can be where you want it, when you need it.

The ork mob structure is VERY restrictive. Redeployment and maneuver are not realistic options for ork strategy (which is more like a sledgehammer). Such restriction diminish the use of a unit, not increase it. Also, add to this that mainly blood axes use it and use is even more restricted. Having used them in an ork force many times over the years I could make a good argument to LOWER the current cost, not increase it. Its just not the greatest of units in an ork force.

Primarch

ok, i think it is ok...because I have found another reason why it is ok for me that the land raider cost value of the marines is increased to 250...the predator...in sm2nd they had the same cost value each 200 for a detachment. and honest, I have never took the predator, because the land raider is much better by same points...the one more attack dice did not fit that. now there is an argument for choosing a predator unit...50 pints less cost!
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
darkangel
 Post subject: why this illogical army mixing
PostPosted: Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:55 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 12:55 am
Posts: 470
Location: Germany

(primarch @ Apr. 15 2007,02:02)
QUOTE

(darkangel @ Apr. 14 2007,17:47)
QUOTE

(darkangel @ Apr. 14 2007,21:05)
QUOTE

another question:

how did you generally set the costs of the units?

example: 4 robots = 150 points
? ? ? ? ? ? ? 4 dreadnaughts = 100 points

I do not see any further reason for me choosing the robots?! and by the way, the deredeo can move up to 5cm more. ok, the robots armour is btter by 1 but they both use the the weapons...

he reason why i am asking is that the cost value was equal set at 100 points in sm2nd.

Did you change this because of praxis in battle and the robots seems to be more dangerous then dreadnaughts???

Hi!

Good point. This may be an error. Although robots don't have a morale characteristic and are fearless, they do have a restrictive order scheme, so it balances out.

I believe they should be 100 points as well.

Add this to errata to be fixed.

Primarch

yes, i think so too...they both should cost 100 points...advantages and disadvantages are in balance at all.

and how and when could that be changed in the armylists?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
vanvlak
 Post subject: why this illogical army mixing
PostPosted: Sun Apr 15, 2007 10:58 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 7:52 am
Posts: 10348
Location: Malta

(darkangel @ Apr. 14 2007,21:53)
QUOTE
question: what is "vanvlak" :blush:

:D  :D  :D
I am  :p

Ok, here goes: when I was an undergrad student in the faculty of engineering* we had a materials text book written by one Van Vlack. Today I lecture at the same univ, as part of the materials dept. Since you can find several names in WH and 40K with von and van this or the other, I thought I'd join in with something which, instead of being the name of some hero, is instead the name of the author of an engineering textbook.
Well, that's my idea or irony or something, anyway...  :p


*in the dark ages.

_________________
Back from oblivion (again)?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
loofnick
 Post subject: why this illogical army mixing
PostPosted: Sun Apr 15, 2007 11:20 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:35 pm
Posts: 246
Location: Sheffield, England

(darkangel @ Apr. 15 2007,07:55)
QUOTE
yes, i think so too...they both should cost 100 points...advantages and disadvantages are in balance at all.

and how and when could that be changed in the armylists?

Hi,
I did post the issues with robots in the stickied errata thread, in this section of the forum.  I assume it was picked up  by OzTenaka for correction, though noone suggested an appropriate fix.  It's actually more wrong then you mentioned.  

Other, army specific errata threads are in this section as well.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
darkangel
 Post subject: why this illogical army mixing
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 6:05 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 12:55 am
Posts: 470
Location: Germany

(loofnick @ Apr. 15 2007,11:20)
QUOTE

(darkangel @ Apr. 15 2007,07:55)
QUOTE
yes, i think so too...they both should cost 100 points...advantages and disadvantages are in balance at all.

and how and when could that be changed in the armylists?

Hi,
I did post the issues with robots in the stickied errata thread, in this section of the forum. ?I assume it was picked up ?by OzTenaka for correction, though noone suggested an appropriate fix. ?It's actually more wrong then you mentioned. ?

Other, army specific errata threads are in this section as well.

hi yesterday we played the first time after a long 14 years break...it was great...tyranids+marines+squats against chaos+orks+guards, we have not finished...but it worked very well...

it is more fun and tacitcal with activating the units side by side and you do not know the orders from the other troops...snap fire, overrun and the transport rule....it was much fun...but there was one situation with "bail of" we did not know what to do...I drove with rhinos to attack some orks in close combat, some ork vehicles (I do not know the name of the ugly stuff :D ) were of first fire and snap to me at half way. 2 rhinos destroyed but on grey hunter could bail of...but what now? the rhinios drove in close combat, because this was the order an the single grey hunter stand? lost on the half way, what do do, because then he was out of formation...how to handle this kind of situation?...hey and another thing...the other side were very confused about attacking te tyranid titan...wow...8 wounds, first a save and then a fixed one with 5+ and 6+ on the importand tails and 4+ to the legs...hard to beat...I would say you need vortex and/or warp missles if you know you are fighting against tiranids...what do you think?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
zap123
 Post subject: why this illogical army mixing
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 7:09 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 2:47 am
Posts: 3065
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Tyranid Titans are very, very, very hard to kill. ?You need to lay into them with an extraordinary amount of firepower to drop them usually. ?Yesterday I hit one with 3 Gyrocopters in the rear arc, another 3 in front and an Overlord with all 10 attack dice.  Actually managed 1 critical and caused a total of 4 wounds.  In the end phase it regenerated all of them.   :(

Occasionally you can get lucky though. ?

I suspect that with all the boosts given to Titans since the SM2/TL days the Bug titans are a bit borderline now, as it is very, very difficult to kill one with ranged fire, and it's now close to impossible to hurt them in HtH. ?For a Heirophant, statistically you need to inflict 16 wounds on it in one turn to kill it. ?When you think about it, ignoring Criticals temporarily, assuming front arc, and assuming none of your shots scatters off the template (!!) you would have to shoot a Heirophant with 48 Land Raiders to get 16 wounds. ?If one in 4 hits causes an extra wound through criticals you'd still need to shoot it with 36 Land Raiders. ?Those same 36 Land Raiders would strip a Reaver of all its shields and force it to make 20 saves at -2, or strip a Warlord of its' shields and force 18 ?4+ saves against the reactor........




_________________
Fire bad, tree pretty - Buffy
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Mojarn Piett
 Post subject: why this illogical army mixing
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 8:19 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 7:35 am
Posts: 5455
Location: Finland
Ok, before discussing the "allies" theme further, please remember one thing: Net Epic fluff diverged from GW mainstream a long time ago.

In the Rogue Trader era, which is the basis of Net Epic universe, things were radically different. The races actually interacted with each other. Orks even had some intelligence as opposed to having everything written in their spores' genetic code (argh) and automatically shooting everything in sight. And they didn't reproduce from spores either. The Emperor occasionally took active hand in the greater matters of the galaxy and even communicated with the high lords and a select few others. The Squats existed. Machine god didn't. And so on.

This means while the Imperium, for example,  is certainly xenophobic it is not automatically bent on total genocide of all aliens. Thus, alliances are possible for mutual gain (the enemy of my enemy and so on) and there is even some trade between the different races.

The Net Epic way has always been to encourage divergence.  Let's keep it that way.

That said, if more restrictive approach is sought I would propose lowering the amount of allies to 25% of point allowance. That would keep allies mostly away from smaller games.

_________________
I don't know and I let who care. -J.S.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
darkangel
 Post subject: why this illogical army mixing
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 9:43 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 12:55 am
Posts: 470
Location: Germany

(zap123 @ Apr. 16 2007,07:09)
QUOTE
Tyranid Titans are very, very, very hard to kill. ?You need to lay into them with an extraordinary amount of firepower to drop them usually. ?Yesterday I hit one with 3 Gyrocopters in the rear arc, another 3 in front and an Overlord with all 10 attack dice. ?Actually managed 1 critical and caused a total of 4 wounds. ?In the end phase it regenerated all of them. ? :(

Occasionally you can get lucky though. ?

I suspect that with all the boosts given to Titans since the SM2/TL days the Bug titans are a bit borderline now, as it is very, very difficult to kill one with ranged fire, and it's now close to impossible to hurt them in HtH. ?For a Heirophant, statistically you need to inflict 16 wounds on it in one turn to kill it. ?When you think about it, ignoring Criticals temporarily, assuming front arc, and assuming none of your shots scatters off the template (!!) you would have to shoot a Heirophant with 48 Land Raiders to get 16 wounds. ?If one in 4 hits causes an extra wound through criticals you'd still need to shoot it with 36 Land Raiders. ?Those same 36 Land Raiders would strip a Reaver of all its shields and force it to make 20 saves at -2, or strip a Warlord of its' shields and force 18 ?4+ saves against the reactor........

oh god...i have not known that there is still another titan with 16 wounds...but honest...i think the tyranid titan is to strong in relation to the others...i think the only way to destroy ONE titan is to use all 4 warp or vortey missles, but then you need up to 2 worlords...hey, we are thinking about changing the rule for the tyrandit titan...there is absolutly no relation...and the imagine of your example is an argument for this!
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
darkangel
 Post subject: why this illogical army mixing
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 11:07 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 12:55 am
Posts: 470
Location: Germany

(loofnick @ Apr. 15 2007,11:20)
QUOTE

(darkangel @ Apr. 15 2007,07:55)
QUOTE
yes, i think so too...they both should cost 100 points...advantages and disadvantages are in balance at all.

and how and when could that be changed in the armylists?

Hi,
I did post the issues with robots in the stickied errata thread, in this section of the forum. ?I assume it was picked up ?by OzTenaka for correction, though noone suggested an appropriate fix. ?It's actually more wrong then you mentioned. ?

Other, army specific errata threads are in this section as well.

hey nick,

how to beat a tyranid-titan? read the discussion here!
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
loofnick
 Post subject: why this illogical army mixing
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 1:35 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:35 pm
Posts: 246
Location: Sheffield, England

(darkangel @ Apr. 16 2007,11:07)
QUOTE
hey nick,

how to beat a tyranid-titan? read the discussion here!

Best way I ever found to kill any unit, was to have your careless, clumsy Dad wander through the room, treading on units (usually the unique or well painted ones- took me years to repair that Warhound :glare: ).  (Un)fortunately this option isn't generally available in later life.  :)

Never had to deal with Tyranids, they were produced after we stopped playing Space Marine- I don't know the rules well.  Saving throws look awful though-  couple of Warhounds with Vulcan Mega-Bolters and a bit of something else?  Though that's suicide for Warhounds on an open table.  Maybe Bio-Ts are just underpriced?

Maybe another discussion for the errata, when we get around to Tyranids.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 3 of 5
  [ 69 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net