Comments on: The Point Holder http://www.at-43addict.com/strategy/the-point-holder/ Covering Rackhams Tabletop Game AT-43 Thu, 18 Aug 2011 10:50:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: Vastatum http://www.at-43addict.com/strategy/the-point-holder/comment-page-1/#comment-480 Vastatum Sun, 01 Feb 2009 16:28:32 +0000 http://at-43addict.com/?p=327#comment-480 Landing is a bit of an interesting scenario as the attacker isn't trying to compete for VP point positions. In this situation you'll want to be able to take out infantry units primarily as getting AFV's off the table does not generate enough VP for the attacker to win. As the attacker a few smaller units is definitely the way to go as you get to increase the number of medics / overseers with reconstruction available to you and improve the chances a unit will make it off the battlefield. As the defender you want to be able to ground units to buy you time to generate VP. So smaller point holder units would be good but you only have 1 special weapon. A full sized point holder cover 2 of the side VP points. A unit with 2/3 flamers will make any small unit think twice about trying to advance through them. I'd say give it a go and see which might work out best for you. Landing is a bit of an interesting scenario as the attacker isn’t trying to compete for VP point positions. In this situation you’ll want to be able to take out infantry units primarily as getting AFV’s off the table does not generate enough VP for the attacker to win. As the attacker a few smaller units is definitely the way to go as you get to increase the number of medics / overseers with reconstruction available to you and improve the chances a unit will make it off the battlefield. As the defender you want to be able to ground units to buy you time to generate VP. So smaller point holder units would be good but you only have 1 special weapon. A full sized point holder cover 2 of the side VP points. A unit with 2/3 flamers will make any small unit think twice about trying to advance through them. I’d say give it a go and see which might work out best for you.

]]> By: Paul http://www.at-43addict.com/strategy/the-point-holder/comment-page-1/#comment-479 Paul Sun, 01 Feb 2009 12:04:57 +0000 http://at-43addict.com/?p=327#comment-479 How about multiple, smaller point holders which can gobble up more key locations? For example, in Landing, we find we need more, smaller units in order to cover all the objectives. Yes they are elimated more quickly, but then again you get more activations too. How about multiple, smaller point holders which can gobble up more key locations?

For example, in Landing, we find we need more, smaller units in order to cover all the objectives. Yes they are elimated more quickly, but then again you get more activations too.

]]>