So, the Skitarii PDF list... I'm going to propose a radical series of modifications to the list for discussion.

To whit:


DELETE THE FOLLOWING UNITS:
Baneblade
Shadowsword
Stormblade
Stormsword

CHANGE THE FOLLOWING:
"(Add one Super Heavy Tank)" for Tank Cataphract to "(Add one Macharius Tank)"
Drop points cost of Skitarii Demi-Century from 300pts to 275pts.




And a possible even more radical option in addition, that I maybe prefer:


DELETE THE FOLLOWING:
Leman Russ formation
Macharius formation



=======================

Basically I'm looking at ways of putting more emphasis on the iconic Ad-Mech units, rather than the kitchen-sink approach we have now.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I think that's a bad idea - I'm collecting my Ad-Mech as from Mars itself which means they like Shadowswords but wouldn't touch Machariuses with a ten foot barge pole (nor Stormswords).

Machariuses aren't especially Ad-Mech associated, in-fact as sort of worse knock-off Baneblades we could assume that the Adepts might be more likely to keep better proper Baneblades for themselves and more pass the Machariuses off to the guard.

I strongly dislike deleted the Leman Russ formation too, IMO having all plasma / vanquisher russes is very in character for the Ad-Mech.

The way I'm kinda eyeballing at things right now, an army that heavily featured SHT's would be better served with a dedicated list like the Minervan Tank Legion (Proxied as a Martian Skitarii Tank force)... it kinda feels like their presence is detracting from the more iconic Mechanicus units in the list (Ordinatii, Skitarii, Knights, etc).

Obviously, it's a *big* proposed change!

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Mind you the single one I do agree on deleting is the Stormsword, as it's mostly a field workshop conversion or adopted by a few very radical adepts. Considering most senior Adepts hate the idea of it I don't think it's really appropriate to be in the list for their own armies. It's arguably the best of the 4 superheavies anyway, which distinguishes the list from IG lists.

I wouldn't be averse to removing the option to have a command Superheavy amongst the Russes though, that's always seemed like a bit unnecessary to me. Perhaps also make a Superheavy 0-1 per core formation if you're bothered about it? Can't say I've ever been tempted to go overboard on Superheavies in an Ad-Mech army though and you're already more limited by not being have companies of them.

I'll try and post up some other suggestions for the list at some point (I think Forge Knights could be done better differently for one thing), but I have other things I need to get done tonight.

I haven't given it much thoughts but I think I tend to agree with you there E&C.
I think the "all the best toys in the Imperium" aspect does in fact makes the list less flavourful and interesting, even if it might be argued for based on the source background.

I see the macharius as the mechanicus' version of the leman russ. The formation as they stand now perform effectively the same role and are an interesting means to provide tank support differently from the traditional guard list. To that end I would see the standard russ and vanquisher formation deleted with the macharius taking over its role supported by squadrons of the higher tech executioners.

I do like the idea of emphasis on skitarii, ordinatii, and knights, but I think there needs to be a bit more variety to make the army interesting to play. If the superheaves and russ go, I think the macharius needs to stay to provide a unique heavy tank aspect to the list.

EDIT: I guess what I'm saying is I see the progression for mechanius something like this: Macharius > executioner russ > Ordinatus Minorus (functions as your typical superheavy) > Majoris (special centerpiece) > Titans (alternative centerpiece)

_________________
-Vaaish

I like the idea of keeping Macharius tanks (As they're the same hullform as the Gorgon).

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

A further radical proposal: Remove their ability to take the full modular range of Titans, and only allow them to take the same configurations of Titans as every other Imperial list (Either Standard Configurations, or Imperial Titan Configurations, depending what your gaming group allows)?

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I'd say that if any army should get the full range of titan weapons (beside the AMTL itself) it's these guys.
All the fluff has the Skitarii and the Titan Legions working so closely together and I don't really want to see any restrictions on the available weapons for these 2 lists (I fully support certain restrictions for most/all other lists).

_________________
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.

I'm in favor of dropping the cost of Skitarii to 275. The other changes, I'm not in favor of. Actually, I wouldn't mind ditching the Baneblade in favor of the Macharius, which I like having in the list to make it less similar to the IG list. I never take a Baneblade.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart

Absolutely not! I don't see fully modular Titans as a problem.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart

I don't like the idea of removing the Baneblade hulls or the advanced Russes. These tanks are only able to be produced on Forgeworlds, unlike many of the less advanced armored vehicles. I understand the reasons for including the Macharius, i.e. they were in Titanicus, but they are, after all, cheap knock-offs of the real thing.

Now, I can see how these tanks (and the artillery)could make the list 'feel' like IG, but the differing unit sizes and, especially, the ability to add a superheavy to a Tank Cataphract, make it organizationally distinct from IG.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

You may decide to see Macharius as better Leman russes rather than second choice Baneblades. Gameplay wise, it would make sense.

My problem is not that it's not organisationally different to the IG... it's that the list as a whole is playing too much like the IG.

Through the use of the highly iconic Ordinatus engines, this list has a *huge* variety of choice for War Engines (17 different Ord-Minoris configurations, and 20 different Ordinatus Majoris configurations), and the inclusion of Baneblades etc. is starting to seem unnessesary.

Now, I'd contend that Baneblades, Shadowswords, etc, in peoples' collections could easily proxy as Ordinatus Minoris war engines (An Ord-Minoris with a Volcano Cannon makes a good Shadowsword proxy, etc), for those who have already converted up their models.

I'm just very, very worried that the list as it stands:

A - Is too bloated
B - Has no core theme

I feel the list has failed, right now, and needs a good kicking to get it back into line.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I understand your point of view, E&C, but I honestly don't think that the list is too bloated or that it has failed. I might be okay with dropping all of the Super Heavies, if you feel it's necessary. The Minoris pretty much can fill the role of them.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart