Or cut the amount of shock guns. :)
I meant the immunity (shock). :D
Odalisque have it already; :)
Those without immunity(shock) will be immediately dismissed these days.
Yes. Design wise though, if you wanted toys you generally had to take them. That was the value. Why not roll with 1/2/3 wounds for...
Remember when medium infantry generally had the toys?
While I'm confidant that it's a price point issue, I'm more concerned about a coverage issue.
That's why I didn't go into details. It's quite the rabbit hole. THEN the demands will come for immunity(shock) because it's still not good...
Which should be amplifying the problem in that big expensive and/or more versatile models need sources of extra orders to validate themselves? I...
As I see it, this entire discussion revolves around the question is if 15 orders is too much better than 10 orders. The inference is that the...
No. At this juncture if it's needed just uncouple orders from models entirely.
Aaaa Was it supposed to be one large .pdf?
I don't think there's a sectorial out there that wouldn't benefit from 4 to 6 models added to their lineup. EDIT: By which I mean models for...
It's placed at declaration
Welcome back. :)
But the general ARO rules do.
Forgive me if I'm off base here, but ARO require a response to an Active model (enemy) model. Your own template wouldn't be valid.
The probable best approach in my opinion, is a method similar to Raveneye. A book and review of forces based on conflict campaign. Preferably...
I have a number of suggestions for the Army builder functionality. 1) Can ITS upgrades for existing profiles be added into the builder? For...
So each "armybook" would have an even more limited appeal then a larger range? Also will be outdated in a year?
