(netepic @ May 01 2008,12:07)
QUOTE
It's fluffyicious? A word i've never used before and hope to never again.
Sigged.
| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| In retrospect http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=12488 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Thu May 01, 2008 11:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | In retrospect |
Warhounds were init 2+. Would have been so much simpler to balance and handle in armies other than the super good, super fast, super shooty, fearless unit they are. |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Thu May 01, 2008 11:27 am ] |
| Post subject: | In retrospect |
I've always fancied giving them 25cm Speed... |
|
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Thu May 01, 2008 11:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | In retrospect |
Arg, my counter-charge! |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Thu May 01, 2008 11:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | In retrospect |
Whenever a titan is destroyed all AMTL units in LoS take a BP. I like this as an army-wide special rule. Currently the only army special rule is Warhead (Which is more of a list-selection rule anyway)... and most armies get to have one or two special rules... |
|
| Author: | netepic [ Thu May 01, 2008 12:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | In retrospect |
(Evil and Chaos @ May 01 2008,11:54) QUOTE Whenever a titan is destroyed all AMTL units in LoS take a BP. I like this as an army-wide special rule. Currently the only army special rule is Warhead (Which is more of a list-selection rule anyway)... and most armies get to have one or two special rules... I quite like this one - it's harsh, but it's fluffy and delicious. It's fluffyicious? A word i've never used before and hope to never again. |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Thu May 01, 2008 12:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | In retrospect |
(netepic @ May 01 2008,12:07) QUOTE It's fluffyicious? A word i've never used before and hope to never again. Sigged.
|
|
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Thu May 01, 2008 1:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | In retrospect |
Its not for AMTL, its for Warhounds in all lists  Hence the in retrospect!
|
|
| Author: | zombocom [ Thu May 01, 2008 6:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | In retrospect |
Yup, personally I'd love to see all warhounds at 25cm, but without a major NetEA split from SG that's not going to happen. |
|
| Author: | BlackLegion [ Thu May 01, 2008 10:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | In retrospect |
The Mastiff Configuration Warhound from AT1 was slower than the Wolf Configuration. |
|
| Author: | hallonapl [ Tue May 06, 2008 5:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | In retrospect |
(BlackLegion @ May 01 2008,23:59) QUOTE The Mastiff Configuration Warhound from AT1 was slower than the Wolf Configuration. How about the Poodle configuration?! That one was fluffy! (Sorry. Couldn't resist.  )I sort of like the idea of LoS generating BM:s. The question though is whether the warhound is as important to the Imperium as the Avatar is to the Eldar (is this not where the special rule first appeared?) |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|