Jump to content

colki

Members
  • Content Count

    137
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About colki

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

466 profile views
  1. The problem is that, as I explained above, the meta shifts to few high-powered activations with corps taken as a "tax", because now that double AT-ST army is actually *better* at stalling than the other guys fluffy 501st list, as well as more killy. If you've never seen the "corps spam" moans then good for you!
  2. This is a nice idea, but if you carry it through it can lead to an unpleasant outcome. Effectively you are now giving a "deathball" player 0 cost activation padding units that cannot be killed! I'd argue that a meta filled with iconic corps troops bulking up most armies is far preferable to one where every army is expensive commanders + big tough vehicles with 12 stormtroopers cowering at the back hoping not to get noticed while they fulfill the "minimum corps" role. It always amuses me when I see people complaining that most armies have *too many stormtroopers* in a Star Wars game.
  3. The weakness of MSU armies *should* be that those low-quality units can get wiped off the board early by the higher quality units of a low-activation army. The rule that stops minis dying when out of LOS (while also giving their mates out in the open heavy cover) stops that being the reality. That isn't the only factor at play here, obviously, but I do think it's a significant one.
  4. I *may* have put my name down for two more core sets...
  5. I know you meant this sarcastically, but yes that is *exactly* my attitude. Sharing and a generous spirit are important, so I just get enough dice/tokens that I'm happy to share and I try and avoid knowing just how many I have so the loss of of a few bucks of dice never upsets me. Some people are superstitious about their dice (or touchy about other people handling their minis, etc) and sure, I'll respect that, but it's not who I want to be.
  6. My idea for the exhaust weapons is that when suppressed, units don't drop to only one action, instead they MUST use their first action to recover. And swap the points costs on the weapons so the exhaust ones are cheaper, not more expensive :)
  7. My point was this seems like the obvious answer, flowing from both a "simulationist" view and the fact that, rules wise, the position of non-leader models in a melee is not very important. Of course, I also thought allowing the Sabine/Bossk melee in the Invader league final was the obviously correct choice, though it seemed to break a few hearts.
  8. Just put the rest of the minis in base contact with the AT-RTs or Taun-Tauns as close as possible to the unit leader. Easy.
  9. Being ridden by Luke, Leia and Wicket, of course!
  10. Hey Rocket, sorry, this comment was for Caimhuel, not your chart. The very small difference I mention wouldn't really be visible on your (excellent) image.
  11. Spot on. You *are* commiting to activating that unit, but that's it. The chart above is great (thank you CaptainRocket!), but still not equivalent to placing the movement tool unless you have a straight line to your destination. That's why it works really well for units like Boba and Luke with Jump
  12. Did you confirm these with actual pieces? A 27mm base making a speed two move actually travels just under 6" in reality (try it and see). I think you haven't accounted for the curved "cut-outs" in the movement tools.
  13. I replaced a bit over half of the heads of my guys with gadzooks ones. I recommend using flush-cut hobby cutters instead of a knife - I find that much easier to control. Always cut off less rather than more at a time, especially if the heads are brittle (mine were resin) and test fit a zillion times before you put glue on anything. I actually pinned a bunch of mine, but I don't think that was actually necessary, as long as you take your time and have a well fitted head/body interface. I hope that helps!
  14. It's really interesting to read the replies here. There seems to be a subset of people who believe that strike teams = "competitive" and implicitly that "competitive" = jerk. Personally I hate the idea of passing judgement on someone just because they include snipers or the Airspeeder or whatever. Just play the game and have fun, and judge people based on their actions, not some pre-concieved idea of what units are "allowed" or what is "netlisting". I just don't get all the perjoratives that get thrown around. I think Ork summed up my thoughts very well. I think the idea that being in a tournament gives you a licence to be a **** is wrong. That's not being "competitive", it's just being a ****, and that happens with T-47s, Exhaust weapons and no time-limit too ;).
  15. This was prompted by the recent poll, and it struck me that I don't see a lot of difference between playing at home, on a games night, or in a tournament. In all cases, I'm going to play a fun game, roll some dice and try my best to fulfill the objectives. I guess the only difference is at home it's OK if we take 5 hours to play :D. A learning game for a new or less experienced player is, of course, a very different thing. Do you think it's a false dichotomy? Or do you play differently against experienced opponents depending on the context?
×
×
  • Create New...