 
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 6 posts ] |
|
|
CyberShadow
|
Post subject: WarLords???  Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:01 am |
|
| Swarm Tyrant |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9350
Location: Singapore
|
|
You have got to love GW rewrites! The issue here is that there are two different versions of the rule.
The original Ork rules are in the main rule book. In these rules, you must have a Warlord in a fleet that is above 500 points, and one for every 500 points.
The second set of Ork rules appeared in Fanatic Mag, and worked almost in reverse, where each Warlord allowed a certain number of Ork vessels to be bought.
I guess that it really depends on which set of rules you are using.
_________________ https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond. https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
kr00za
|
Post subject: WarLords??? Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2005 9:19 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2003 2:06 pm
Posts: 944
Location: UK
|
|
WARLORD with 1 re-roll.
1 BATTLEKRUZAZ in seperate squadrons
1 squadrons containing 2 KROOZERS each.
1 squadrons of 10 escorts each
1 squadrons of 2 ROKS each.
WARLORD with 2 re-roll.
2 BATTLEKRUZAZ in seperate squadrons
2 squadrons containing 2 KROOZERS each.
2 squadrons of 10 escorts each
2 squadrons of 2 ROKS each.
WARLORD with 3 re-roll.
3 BATTLEKRUZAZ in seperate squadrons
3 squadrons containing 2 KROOZERS each.
3 squadrons of 10 escorts each
3 squadrons of 2 ROKS each.
These are all examples of the maximum number of ships a Warlord can command.
I think the idea of having sub-Warlords every 500pts makes sence. Certainly in real terms a large fleet such as the one shown would have a Warlord on each BattleKruza and a sub-Warlord in each three of the Kroozer squadrons.
The problem I have is the rules are far to vaige.
If it stated that the fleet had to have one Warlord if it was over 500pts and needed an additional "WarBoss" or every 500pts after that it would make more sence.
Even better would be if it said a BattleKruza "such as a Kroolboy for example" must be commanded by a Warlord. And that a squadron of Kroozers "TerrorShips and KillKroozers" must be commanded by a WarBoss.
That would make much more sence. A BattleKruza is a capital ship, if one is included in the fleet then thats where the Warlord will be, also its such an impressive peice of Ork tec that only Warlords would have one.
Kroozers are lesser, but still very impressive vessels and so would have to be commanded by a WarBoss "or if in a squadron of two kroozers, one must have a WarBoss onboard." but only if the kroozer is the fleets biggest ship and/or the fleet is over 500pts
This would give much better structual rules to the Ork Fleet and wouldnt be so damn confusing!
This would mean even a tiny fleet of...
1 KroolBoy 270
1 KillKroozer 155
3 BruteRam 25
Total 500, This fleet needs to include a Warlord as it contains a BattleKruza but no WarBoss is needed to command the KillKroozer as the fleet is equal to or under 500pts.
1 KroolBoy 270
1 KillKroozer 155
10 Onslaughts 400
Total 825, This fleet needs to include a Warlord as it contains a BattleKruza and a WarBoss is needed to command the KillKroozer as the fleet is over 500pts.
1 KillKroozer 155
3 BruteRam 25
Total 230, This fleet contains no Warlord as there is no BattleKruza.
It must have a WarBoss in command of the KillKroozer as it is the largest vessel in the fleet.
Warboss's would work in much the same way as Warlords when in direct command of their own fleet. However they can not be upgraded with additional re-rolls and can not command BattleKruzaz. This would limit the size of a WarBoss lead fleet to a maximum of
1 squadrons containing 2 KROOZERS
1 squadrons of 10 escorts
1 squadrons of 2 ROKS
Its highly unlikely that a fleet containing a Warlord commandered BattleKruza would have no WarBoss's in it. The example I gave above that hits 500pts xzactly is the only fleet that would.
I think doing it this way gives much better structure and a clear chain of command to the fleet.
Oviously theres proberly a few faults in this idea but Im no expert
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
deathlynx
|
Post subject: WarLords??? Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:33 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 11:53 pm
Posts: 65
|
|
Actually it's all one set of rules...unfortunately I was forgetting that you required a Skwadron per re-roll not just a skwadron per Warlord...Here's a samplete fleet with all requirements (4 Warlords and 5 Skwadrons due to 5 total rerolls)...
Sample Fleet (2000 pts)...
(275) Warlord 1 Reroll
1 Kill Kroozer
3 Savage Gunships
(485) Warlord 1 Reroll
1 Terror ship
10 Grunt Ships
(505) Warlord 2 Rerolls
1 Kill Kroozer
4 Brute Ramships
+
1 Kill Kroozer
3 Brute Ramships
(735) Warlord 1 Reroll
1 Deathdeala
1 Terror Ship
1 Kill Kroozer
3 Ravager Attack Ships
_________________
"Ah the Bassilisk, funny how they never name their planet
killer 'The Fluffy Bunny'" -Becka Valentine, Andromida
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
deathlynx
|
Post subject: WarLords??? Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2005 3:05 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 11:53 pm
Posts: 65
|
|
That's exactly right...basically the Skwadron fleet is perfect for those ork players with lots (and I do mean LOTS) of basic cruisers and escorts...
Although it's confusing I like it as it makes people work on basic ship types rather then all of the big nasties and unusual ships...The upside? You get lots of command rerolls (a very good thing for orks)...The more Big ships you take the less rerolls you can take...
_________________
"Ah the Bassilisk, funny how they never name their planet
killer 'The Fluffy Bunny'" -Becka Valentine, Andromida
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 6 posts ] |
|
