Jump to content

von Richtor

Members
  • Content Count

    74
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by von Richtor

  1. Yes, the ability to organize half of your sections as Specialist sections makes Independents an incredibly versatile force. I half expected this to be a Psyro type thing as I pictured it working (being able to regroup sections without a second thought, etc.)
  2. I don't know if you just don't like heavier CAV's or are thinking along the lines of small=fast and fast=good. If the latter is the case, I invite you to consider this statement: Combine this with the fact that KW (Koda Works) is a Rach UCOR and the Rach "Children of the Storm" Factional Doctrine which allows you to substitute 1 point of DV for 2 more points of Mov and makes you even deadlier at point blank range and we might have a winner.
  3. 1) To somebody who has never played the game, these rules can be somewhat daunting. Certainly, trying to deduce how a Fational Doctrine translates from paper to the table is near impossible. 2) I recommend that a newbie Indepenent player make use of the Free-Form Organizational Doctrine rather than the Spoils of War Doctrine. 3) There is no point in having a newbie buy and paint a number of models he will use only once. 4) The only difference between a Rhino OEM and a Ritterlich Rhino right now is a piece of paper. If your TF includes a number of OEM models then you're one data card away from being a Factional TF anyway. An Open Market Task Force gives the newbie the greatest flexability in TF creation and tactical options. If, after playing a couple of games, the player finds a hole in his force that a Faction specific model will plug or, more likely, finds a Factional Doctrine which suits his playing style (now that he actually has one) he can run out and buy a model which allows him to solve his problem.
  4. I failed to utilize the first rule of rule reading that I had, myself, pointed out earlier in another thread. Namely, if it isn't stated, it shouldn't be inferred.
  5. I would also avoid any Faction models until you get a feel for your game.
  6. I think it's probably a case of what suits your playing style as much as anything else. Certainly, your force composition will contribute to this decision as well. If you field a largely Ritterlich Task Force and pick your Open Market models carefully, you may find that 90% of your vehicles have the Assault SA anyway. Who you are fighting and what Faction Doctrine they have adopted (if you can get that information "up front") is also a factor. Getting too close to Adonese infantry or any Rach, for instance, is probably a bad idea. That said, Run (away) N' Gun works too.
  7. And those are soooooooooo effective in combat We don't generally send our women into battle. Do we look Terran to you?
  8. I'm assuming that a weapon with the Blaster SA "auto-hits" on a roll of a natural 9 but it doesn't actually say that.
  9. Well, CAV2 is out so now everybody knows that we have the hottest babes with the cutest little fangs.
  10. <Grabs a quick picture of Chrome "slummin'" it wth the Terrans> "This should fetch a fortune on Mil-Net."
  11. Currently, the minimum section size is four, three of which must be of the attack type. Generally, if no exception is stated, no exception should be inferred. So, my thinking is that Templars can reduce the size of an Armor section from four to three but all three must be of the attack type. For game balance reasons though, they may want to change that of course.
  12. Well, no, the rules don't support that, not like they used to. But I can strip all of the SA's from a CAV (taking Piercing and Shredder down to 1) and build them up again from scratch though. Assuming that that was not the intent (and I do) then it's a "loophole" which should be plugged. Actually, we don't even know yet that it exists but it would if I get "credited" with any SA I remove from a model. Candidly. no one said you could remove SA's from CAV at all but, with upgrades available and Infantry weapon swapping, it would seem a natural extension to a rules laywer.
  13. That's exactly what I'm saying and, though I like that in a game as well, it is beyond the scope of this one I think and why would you stop at the Infantry?
  14. In CAV 1, you subtracted the cost of the weapon systems you removed. So in your example, removing one Mortar and giving the team an FA-45 would actually have made it cost less (hvy mortars were 40 pts, FA-45's were 18). I would guess things will work the same in CAV 2, it just seems like they forgot to give stats for the mortars. Again though, if you do that, there's no point in having "stock" data cards to begin with. I would strip everything bare and build infantry from scratch. In the end, I bring 2,000 points of infantry to the table and it's all, technically, Light Mortar Teams (for instance).
  15. Well, vehicles can have the Avenger SA, it's only Gunships which are problematic. Gunships currently equipped with the Avenger SA are The Hedgehog (both versions) and, I see now, the Badger. I suppose we could remove the SA and back down the points as though they were added as an upgrade. Again though, I'm assuming that the SA was "paid for" in the first place. In any case, I'm betting that upgrades cost more for us to add then they were allotted at time of manufacture. In other words, an upgrade you pay 10 points per DT to add to a model, probably only costs 7 or 8 points per DT for a model which comes with it. Otherwise, you might just as well strip all models of their SA's and go strictly with upgrades across the board.
  16. I would be willing to bet that the Hedgehog having Avenger is a mistake, it has been said that Gunships/Transports don't participate in CC. Bulky was accidentally left off of all three Armored Infantry Entries, that was posted early on in the original DC thread in Cav General. I would say you probably can, but remember you are losing 2in of MV everytime you upgrade. These are the answers I expected/guessed but I thought I would ask just in case. Thanks Gunfighter. Still, these guys seem to have some proprietary method of pointing these models so I would hate to simply remove the Avenger/3 without knowing that it wasn't actually supposed to be Shredder/3 or some such. (I can't just assume that the Hedgehog points don't include some missing SA.)
  17. Well, I'm sure that this was a topic in here at one time so perhaps what I'm about to post is moot but.... Somebody recently said in these forums that Gunships are "immune" to CC, that they simply do not participate. Why then does the Hedgehog have Avenger/3? The rules are pretty clear on what the Bulky SA does but I see no infantry that have it. Can the Increased Transport Capacity upgrade be purchased multiple times for the same unit?
  18. I don't understand the purpose of listing the FA-45 since every type of infantry comes with one. I suppose you could remove the mortar from a mortar team and add a second FA-45 but that just gives you a more costly and less resilient Rifle Team so what gives? How does the IFM work as it's range fall within the "no fire" zone of an IA? Do you just take range band penalties to every legal shot? That's going to cause some confusion I think.
  19. Well thanks for clearing that up for us. FYI: Grunherzjaeger means "Green Heart Hunters" Did he say...."mecha"? Look, that's a BattleTech term! Around here it's either CAV or "Big, giant, stompy robots"!
  20. No wonder you're all so violent, you never had pets as a kid?
  21. <sighs> See? You guys have all of the fun! Thanks to the Grand Fleet, half of the targets you folks send us never make it to planet side. I've had about all of the "watch the meteor shower" assignments I can take.
  22. Actually, if you look around, I think you'll realize that our superiority is not all that complex.
  23. I say field a Templar Specialist Platoon with zero models in it and demand an extra Initiative Card.
×
×
  • Create New...