Epic to DSII

Allan Goodall wrote:

> I think so. I've sent several people my Marine and Ork conversions.
Not
> everyone agreed with them, though. My philosophy was to stick with DS2
as
> the main basis and adapt the GW background/minis/etc. to it, rather
than the
> other way around.

You mention an important point and I agree that the models should be
adapted to DS II rules since they are more realistic.
  
> I ended up building the vehicles as per the DS2 rules. This resulted
in a
> Land Raider that couldn't transport troops. To fix this, I created
another
> Land Raider model with less firepower but more cargo capacity. I also
> created a couple of other vehicles (a HQ vehicle and a counter battery
radar
> vehicle) based on the Rhino chassis. Some people liked this idea, but
others
> detested it. It depends on whether you want the resulting fusion to be
"true
> to DS2" or "true to GW".

For those who play WH40K (I dont) have you ever wondered how ten power
armored space marines fit in to that small rhino? Or ten terminators
into a land raider? Obviously they dont. I have basically defined the
land raider as a main battle tank and also made a lighter armed counter
part so as to carry one terminator stand. As for the rhino it is used by
many armies and holds to reason you could pack 10 lightly armored troops
where as only 5 powered armored troops could fit. 

As for the DSII or "true to GW" issue I believe that the DSII
translation of GW models better represent their background. Marines with
their better morale and targetting systems will be very expensive but
much more effective per unit than Imperial Guard for example. Therefore
the legendary few space marines vs. the many orks (lower quality troops)
would be represented. Any one whose played epic knows that two stands
against one due to the extra combantants bonus nearly always spelled
death for the outnumbered units with very few exceptions.

Peter