Well, since a single assault is supposed to represent a "whole game of 40k", the booby traps are an abstraction of ambushes, actual booby traps, and general fieldcraft.


Essentially, yes.  The "Two plane squadron" that the Steel Legion, and most other IG armies, use was supposed to represent their use in a theatre where the Imperial airbases had been seriously overrun by Orks, allowing fewer planes to be used.

Over time the "two plane squadron" has just become the defacto formation size, but it's not set in stone, and I often intro a different sized formation in either air-reliant or technologically advanced IG armies.



Why would you have to destroy one of you models?  Just put markers near any units with demo charges and remove them as you use 'em!

If one-shot is an issue in play, the unit can be re-examined.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Chroma, should the Thunderbolt squadrons be 225? Are they more expensive because they perhapslast longer so have a built-in expense?

New typo:

Just play a danged game with 'em and report instead of using that fine-toothed comb on the paperwork!  

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Hi,

I have been using the NetEA lists for a few years now, many thanks to all who have contributed to their greatness

Ive played the Catachan DV list for a number of months now (proxied) and really like how they play, they have just enough air cav to feel air cav'y but also enough cheaper ground units to be able to hold ground and compete for objectives effectivly.

There are a number of observations that I would make however:

Flak/AA: I agree totally with not having ground flak (no hydras etc), and with strengthening the fighter cover (flights of 3 thunderbolts) but Im not convinced that its enough air cover to deter air assaults that would be 'suicidal' vs many other armies, for example: landing craft/vampire raiders dropping on blitz objective, to pull that off against most armies you would need to go through heavy flak and probably a CAP too, vs catachans you only have to get past a CAP of 3 thunderbolts. I have used the 4 flight of lightnings from the elysian list for a number of games now and find it gives me a nice CAP that is marginally more powerful than 3 thunderbolts but psychologically a flight of 4 fighters on CAP gives a much more noticable deterrant to optimistic air assaults.

Another point is mortar squads, they have AP rather than BP which to me indicates they are light portable mortars (great, fits the army style) but they have 45cm Indirect Fire, rules as written means they would double range to 90cm when on sustained fire, seems kinda far to me, I think the intention is 45cm range (which seems reasonable) Have I missed a note that disallows the range doubling for this unit or would 25cm Indirect (allowing the doubling) be more suitable?

What do you use for your mortars Nat? I've been trying to work out what to do for mine.

I currently use proxies (IG heavy weapons teams), but was planning to scratch build them using plasticard rod drilled out for the barrel and wire for the stand, crewed with DRM jungle troops.

i cannae seem to find the rules for these.
my friend has much love for the catachan, and i might be able to tempt him with these

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

Look in the NetEA IG document, Jagged.

http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=16694

Once the NetEA army books are out, I'll be hitting this list a lot harder to shape it up for fighting the Tyranids, so I'll be examining your comments more in depth at that time.

Thanks for the input!