Squats: Stubborn discussion (again) |
|
Moscovian
|
Post subject: Re: Squats: Stubborn discussion (again)  Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 3:22 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
|
|
War engines (like a lot of these ideas) are in flux. The big ones could easily be allowed a 1+ initiative with a +1 on their rally (effectively giving them a 0+ rally initiative), but we would need to price them accordingly. I'm just pointing out that a 2+ initiative didn't affect much in the two games from the weekend.
_________________ author of Syncing Forward and other stories...It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
Evil and Chaos
|
Post subject: Re: Squats: Stubborn discussion (again) Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 3:24 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
|
|
I think it's previously been more generally to represent the more elite nature of the Titan choices as compared to the chump infantry (IG & Guardians).
...Warhounds & Baneblades are the same DC etc, but that Warhounds are just more "elite" and so activate better?
Eldar Titans are in a similar situation, same DC as SHT's in the case of Revenants but more elite than a Scorpion crew I guess?
It's worth noting that those two have low numbers of crew, whilst Squat War Engines are going to have a lot of crew comparable to a Gargant or similar in crew numbers I guess.
Just rambling...
|
|
| Top |
|
|
