+ easier to break

This is a good solution in my view, if it has to be changed.

cheers

Hi!

I played E:A with a friend today - he was using the "THURGRIMM'S STRONGHOLD SQUAT ARMY LIST" v4.0 from the NetEA Compendium.

Now here I find a v1.0 list with the same name. Are these two different lists, or did something happen with the indices

I'm asking because I have some serious issues with the list in the compendium; I think the list found here (v1.0) is much more reasonable.

So, where do I have to go to rant about the v4.0 list, or can I save my breath because v1.0 is an evolution of the v4.0 list?

cheers,
M

This list is the one that Will be in the compendium next year when it's updated, but with à few changes. Earlier this year squats got a new army champion, because work on the list had stoped for a long time. It was decided that list needed a lot of rethinking.

We tried to start from the begining again and didn't really use the 4.0 list. Since it was really a new effort it got the name 1.0. Which perhaps in hindsight is a bit unfortunate/confusing, it will be more clear when the compendium is updated.

Cheers

Sorry about the confusion. The 1.0 list is effectively a reboot. Think of it like the Spiderman movies or Batman movies.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Wellll... not the new Spiderman, but definitely the new Batmans!

Sorry I'm late to the party!
Is the Thurgrim going to be a progression of the Demiurg list?
Will there still be a seperate Demiurg list?

We just finished a 4 week campaign in which the Demiurg V5 list was used.
I get that this is a thread for the Thurgrim but some of our experiences apply here.

First up, the Squat player pretty much flat out refused to use the latest Thurgrim list (he was given the option). 10cm and no scout units, on top of his perceived nerf of the mole mortars meant he would play Marines if we tried to use the Thurgrim list. I wanted to see the Squats in lay so Demiurg it was.

I have faced them several times now and seen other games in which they took part.

Here's a quick quote of some of my thoughts from another thread:


I think the Thurgrim Goliath should have reinforced armour. Apart from that, I like it (it could have MW instead of Ignore cover).

I don't think 10cm move would work in Epic (especially on the core units of the army). The game mechanics just don't seem to support it (for me anyway). The reasons against it have been said already ansd I don't have anything to add.

The lack of a scouts is an issue. The local meta game is quite heavy with teleporters (several Necron players, along with a few Marines and Chaos armies that feature lots of Terminators). If the strategy rating is to be 2 (and I tagree it should be) then they will need a scout screen of some sort.

Anyway, take that as you will.
I really want to see a working Squat list as the local Squat player is a fanatic (as was mentioned earlier in this thread by Spectrar Ghost/elsmore).

Cheers,
Steve.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

Hey Onyx, good to see your name. Very briefly, it appears that I need to get a 1.3 list up. Sorry for the delays. I've been... distracted.

Anyhow, the 10cm move is going to be done away with. Other concerns you wrote have been dealt with a long time ago but I simply failed to post the list. By the week's end for sure (somebody remind me if I don't!).

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Hi Moscovian,

You were going to post the updated Thurgrimm Stronghold list?

As a long time Squat player, be very interested to see what you've done with it

Mark

_________________

Many apologies. Too many irons in the fire. Yes, an updated list will be forthcoming.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Ah good, was just about to report similar experiences to Onyx based on feedback from a local squat fan.

I look forward to seeing the updated 1.3 list.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/

Played a game vs the Squats yesterday, and we made the following observations:

*Thunderers are very, very shooty, and priced so that the warrior brotherhood with two thunderer upgrades became the BTS. I would drop their price to 100pts/4 and remove the missile launcher.

*At no point did the 10cm move become an issue - garrisons or transports made up for it. I would give the berzerkers a 15cm move and remove infiltrate.

*The Overlord is crazy good for its price -six battlecannon shots and eight (one shot) BP for 200pts? Comparing to say a company of leman russ, you get three overlords for the same price, packing 18 WE-mounted battlecannon shots (almost twice of the tank company), and three rounds of fire on the level of an artillery company.

*The Goliath MC is also slightly under-priced, imho - for 450 pts you get the equvalent of an artillery company's BP (usually 600 pts), with ignore cover.

*The land train and the collossus seems very ok to me. I'd change the cyclops critical so that it suffers a DC on 3+ when firing, or even automatically - the game is only a fem turns long, after all!

*None of us understood how to use the pithead- why emerge from the pit when you can garrison instead? If you could have more than one, it would have been more clear.

*I would give the option to field (slightly) bigger units of robots - it's a bit unclear what their role on the battlefield actually is...!

Overall though, great job, and we look forward to the next iteration of the list!

The stats were made to satisfy multiple players' desires and keep them close to old school with the 3 shots. It's a compromise. Points are flexible though.



It was rarely a problem for me, but other players had issues. Disappointing perhaps, but we'll be trying something else out.



*The Goliath MC is also slightly under-priced, imho - for 450 pts you get the equvalent of an artillery company's BP (usually 600 pts), with ignore cover.

It’s a weird formation. I’ve been on the receiving end of them where they destroyed me utterly. I’ve also been able to wipe them out without them ever firing a shot. It’s a tough one to balance.



I can look at it.



I started with two but then changed it to be more like an Eldar Wraithgate in design for the sake of shortening the learning curve. The purpose, however, is to provide a location where you can’t get shot at from. It also increases the ability to get more formations close to the enemy.



Not sure if you wanted bigger units as in bigger robots? Or bigger formations? If it was the former, we are working on another list with more robot unit types. If the latter, we decided on formations of five based on old lists. The autonom rule makes them rather sturdy and I’ve used robots (and had them used on me) quite effectively. Why are they there? Diversity, because there is a model, BM absorption, etc…



Thanks. It isn’t perfect, but the list is coming along. The kids are going to grandma’s next week so I’ll have time to devote to the Squats.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Any evolution with the 1.3 list?

Sorry to ring the bell, but one of our players is about to paint some squats, and he would like to know how stable the formation compositions are...

Cheers,

LotM

_________________
"War is not about who is right, but about who is left". - B. Russell

I'd be interested in an updated copy of the list. Here's some feedback from games I've had with the current list:

The army as it stands works well - played a few draws, seems overall similar to guard with some noted weaknesses(no heavy tank companies/lack of air/Firefight/Scouts) and pluses(Cheap artillery/excellent WE's.)

On individual units:

Squats infantry - the 10cm move doesn't come up too much as they all get access to Rhinos/tunnelers. I don't think it actually makes too much of a difference, only in assaults if your opponent is clever/numerous and prevents you from retreating - which I don't imagine is going to come up a lot. If it does get changed to 15cm, Bezerkers probably need to lose infiltrate.

I like the current stubborn rule - it's simple and makes small units of artillery/Thunderfires that might otherwise be too fragile work better. Hope this hasn't changed!

Being able to attach Thunderfires as an upgrade to squads might be a good idea - in the games I played they generally got assaulted/barraged(they're easily broken), and with that done armies with a heavy air presence could run riot. This would also be useful for people who have very few/odd numbers of them. If the squats had air units I don't think this would be necessary, but as it stands I think it'd be a good idea.

The war engines all seem very good(On a par with very good war engines from other lists, like Decimators and Warhounds) but I take it this is supposed to be the main strength of the Squat army. (They certainly have weaknesses.)

Guildmaster - not sure why his CC is worse than that of the rest of his unit. (5+ not 4+) Is this a typo, or would you consider 4+ with first strike overpowered?

I think the Gyro's should keep the 4+ save - Squats are heavily armoured and without 4+ they're a longer range(but in every other way) worse and more expensive squad of falcons.

Thanks for all the work you've done on this - look forward to the new list.

_________________

Hi Moscovian!

Any progress on 1.3? I'd like to playtest the list again, but I've been putting that on hold for the next iteration.

cheers