Switch Theme:

Change ”the reaper” itc?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in se
Regular Dakkanaut




Hi

What do you think about lowering the reapers minimum requirement to 9 model units so that 9-19 gives one point, 20+ two? It would be a nice way to indirectly tax the IG:s mad cp spam, having say knights giving up an easy 3 vp for a battery? Or just count weapon platforms as 2?
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




That doesn't make a lot of sense. I'm not defending the AM codex as balanced but they're basically paying points to avoid that when getting heavy weapons.

You're also changing a house rule entirely to attack a single army rather than fixing the core problems of the army itself.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K Proposed Rules
Go to: