Re: SG2-What's it like?

From: "Michael Llaneza" <maserati@flash.net>

> All the people who play games at GW seem to think that tactics 
> stopped with the musket. The setups for Space Marine (et al) in the 
> battle reports are actually worse. They set up  opposing*tanks* in 
> range of each other. <shudder> It seems any deployment more complex 
> than the French at Crecy (three successive lines) is completely past 
> them, and they don't, as noted, give machine guns the firepower of a 
> longbowman.

True in WH40k as far as I can see. I've never been sufficiently
interested
in it, based upon the lack of tactical richness.

Rather different in E40k - though even there it plays more like Waterloo
than Kursk. Infantry can't charge MG nests without getting in a world of
hurt, but they can be over-run by fast armour. 

More to the point, the idea of keeping reserves, using pinning forces,
withdrawal for re-organisation etc is essential if you want to win
against
anyone but a complete novice. Army choice is less important - just don't
try to use tactics appropriate for the Imperial Guard when using
Tyrannids,
or vice-versa.