Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2

 Post subject: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 1:21 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2015 7:34 am
Posts: 91
Hi All,

Please find version 4.2 of the Yme-Loc Craftworld List. The main theme of the Yme-Loc Craftworld is a War-Engines list. So why this direction with the list, well in W40K Codex: Eldar (6th edition) - Yme-Loc boasts many weaponsmiths who supply its warhosts with Engines of Vaul and lithe titans that dwarf the Gargants of the Orks and the God-machines of the Imperium. Though it is not openly spoken of, the craftworld also possesses an arcane engine of destruction that can destroy a continent in a single night. So it seam factual that the list be themed this way...Also we now have the Mymeara Craftworld and there is considerable overlap between the two and both are not needed IMHO…So there is an opportunity to make separate ‘tank’ list and ‘war-engine’ list.

So with that in mind the following changes have happen to the Yme-Loc list

1. Phantom added to the Warhost section and given the option on weapon changes. Placing it here since they have a focus on the war engine/titans.
2. Warlock was add to the Warhost section, still 0-1 and no weapons upgrades
3. Copy from the UK Bonesinger...
4. Add the Farseer character…
5. Move the SoV from Warhost to troupe section.
6. Wraith Knight added to the 1/3 titian, spaceships and AC section…formation size is 3….stats also added.
7. Have the sprit gate upgrade option to the usual wraith gate. Only allowing Infantry, Walkers and AV...
8. May Not Garrison rule reworded to reflect for YME-LOC.
9. Make the selection of troupes two instead of three.
10. Engine of Vaul Warhost size change to one W/E and the upgrades are now 200 points each...
11. Change the Guardian troupe...
12. Added Eldar hornets as scouts. Use the basic stats from UK list..
13. Added void spinner- Bound to be contentious. But as one of the other applicant said it nicely” Firstly, it’s the war-engine list, so they should all be available. Secondly, the fluff says “the Craftworld also possesses an arcane engine of destruction that can destroy a continent in a single night”. If they’ve got that, they’re badass enough to use Void Spinners.” And I agree. Still full 275 point each, no reduction for multiples, can’t be taken as a Warhost, but also put 0–1 Void Spinner per EoV Warhost restriction.
14. Added vampire hunter and stats were added…
15. Add titan weapons and stat changes (Fir list) on some of those weapons…I have also gone with no charge on weapons upgrades, bound to be contentious. Also limited the number that could be carried per titian.
15.1- Titan D-Cannon same stats as the weapon on the cobra
15.2- Tremor Cannon- change the BP to 3
15.3- Star cannon- no change
16. Change the Exarch Extra Attack to basically match the aspect type they are assigned too.

17/10/2016

Hi All,
After everyone feedback and testing, have settle on the below changes…
Modify 4.2.1
• Bonesinger change to UK stats
• Change but also put 0–1 Void Spinner per EoV Warhost restriction. Too 0-1 VS per 2 EoV Warhost.
• Remove Guardian completely(Crewing the W/E’s)
• Remove war walkers from the list.
• Change that Aspect must be mounted or come through portal or use Vampire (Rule in Special rules).
• Remove weapons option for phantom
• Move Wraith Knight to Troupe Section
• Warlock have the Bonesinger upgrade option
• Remove phoenix bomber completely
• Removed the “(You may not have more Titan formations than Engine of Vaul Warhost formations)” in the Warhost section..


Attachments:
NetEA-Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2.1.pdf [389.94 KiB]
Downloaded 134 times

_________________
Regard
Trent
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 3:37 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 1:05 am
Posts: 814
On a quick glance, it looks like every strength of every list is in there. Where's the weakness? It just seems like it's a better overall list than all of the other already approved Eldar lists. Am I just missing something obvious?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 5:46 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 10:36 am
Posts: 81
I have to agree with Doom Kitten - this list is scary with all the goods and none of the bad...of course there isn't much bad with the current Eldar list.

I like that you have restricted the infantry units to 6 stands, it is some compensation.

I think have Titan's in your Core will create a Titan list rather than a general WarEngine list - maybe change Core units to Engines of Vaul and Swords of Vaul?

- Kendall


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 7:00 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:35 am
Posts: 2685
I don't think this is good at all. Like previous posts have said you've thrown all the eldar goodies in 1 bag. I really think you missed the mark on this one.

Titans as core is a problem, not having falcon formation as a core formation is a problem, including unmounted guardians is a problem. I could go on and on.

Take a look at the EpicUK list and use that as base.

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 8:50 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 3:19 am
Posts: 32
Well done Roboshadow for putting your hand up to move forward with the Yme-Loc list. I think it's an interesting list that is going to be contentious. I enjoy playing with War-engines, so I'm looking forward to play testing and pushing forward with it.

I have to disagree with Jumping Jehovah and Mordoten. I think it makes complete sense to move forward with the Mymeara Craftworld List as a 'Tank' list, and Yme-Loc as a 'War-Engine' list. There is no need for two 'tank' lists. If we accept that, wouldn't putting falcon formation or Swords of Vaul as a warhost just turns it back into a 'Tank' list?

In fact, wouldn't this just exacerbate the problem Doom Kitten has pointed out? At the moment two 'weaknesses' that leap out at me - its warhost formations are speed 25cm (rather then 35cm like other eldar lists) and it's a low activation army. Putting Swords of Vaul as a warhost would definitely remove those two 'weakness'.

I actually like the unmounted guardians. If all the infantry have to be mounted, Storm Serpents and Vampire Raiders (both War-Engines) become of very limited use. If the focus or theme is 'War-Engines' the list should be geared to using them.

I completely understand and agree with JJ's concern about creating a Titan list. But I can see this list being built as a gun line: heavy with Scorpions and Cobra's; an engagement list: heavy with Storm Serpents and infantry formations; and a quasi-Titan list. I actually see that as a good thing.... but if someone wants to just focus on titans, then we just need to make sure it's balanced to play that way.

So other then turning it back into a tank list (going down the EpicUK Yme-Loc or Mymeara path), what are some other idea's to make it a non-OP war-engine list? Or is that what people want, another 'Tank' list?

Personally, I don't. I just play Mymeara when I want to bring out all my falcons... but what are other peoples opinion?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 9:24 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 2:01 am
Posts: 214
I hope some serious revisions get made before this goes anywhere, Biel Tan is easily the most powerful list in existence and this is just Biel Tan plus.


Last edited by Beefcake4000 on Tue Sep 13, 2016 9:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:13 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 5:35 am
Posts: 193
Gents

Let's not forget where are playing with tiny soldiers for fun.
I know for a fact it can be daunting to step off with a new list as a virgin AC. Good on you Roboshadow for stepping up, don't loose heart with early critiques.

I think many of the comments are valid about the list but think the list shows promise.
I do have concerns about the phantom Titan in Warhost and with the various weapon load outs.
Until titans are addressed in The Titan list I would recommend you stick to the standard weapon load outs and maybe move it into troupes.

I think the point Beefcake made about the Minervan core choices is good and maybe something we can look at. In this I mean we can look at Warhost formations of engines of Vaul 2-3 strong only (no singles) that unlocks 3 (maybe 2) troupe choices. To offer up another WE choice for the Warhost section I would consider maybe moving the Wraithknights into warhosts. I know these are new and need testing but they suit the WE theme of the list and avoid any pitfalls with the titans presently.

I will keep going over the list and come up with some more thoughts and feedback.

Cheers

Mic


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:31 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 2:01 am
Posts: 214
Extensive play testing by skilled players will hopefully illustrate the obvious power of this list


Last edited by Beefcake4000 on Tue Sep 13, 2016 9:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:55 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 3:19 am
Posts: 32
Sorry Beefcake, I'm confused now. I thought your first post was tongue-in-cheek and meant to be humorous? That's why I responded the way I did. I found this comment particularly amusing:

Quote:
So long as it stays at "fanboys wet dream" status and never even glances at competitive play its all good, play whatever you like with your friends who can build something to potentially take it on.

Onto other more 'serious' matters. Mic, if the list went down the path of the EoV formation being two - three, do you think there needs to be a troupe that is only one strong? Or are you suggesting that it's just a Yme-Loc 'thing' that EoVs don't come in singles?

Certainly having the Warhosts at minimum two (for 450 points) would allay the fears of peeps like Beefcake about activation numbers.

Regards

Harry


Last edited by Gunslinger9 on Tue Sep 13, 2016 3:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 1:08 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 5:35 am
Posts: 193
Gunslinger9, I think you could easily allow single EOV choices in your troupe section and this would allow the void spinner in there too. But I think the warhosts would be best to help balance the list by having the size of 2-3. Another option is to consider the Warhost EOV to take upgrade units like firestorms etc much like hydras for Guard super heavy formations.. This could reflect the Craftworld ethos of protecting and supporting the EOV formations which constitute their main fighting formations...Just shooting ideas out there at the moment.


Mic


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 1:09 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 11:43 pm
Posts: 2174
Location: UK
Let's all calm down a bit eh? Beefcake I think you may represent a minority view here regarding the biel tan list. I for one am not worried about that list build, which is already doable in biel tan and scorpions are not exactly the most favoured units in biel tan.

In fact I have no qualms particularly (subject to testing of course) about single eov hosts. At the very least they should be options in the list as troupes. Having taken quite an interest in yme loc myself it has always been a bit frustrating with the old euk list only ever being able to take them in multiples. If you are also removing falcons from core (in order to force WEs onto the table, I get it) then I think single eovs should probably be core too. The reason is without rangers they lack the common activation booster formation of other eldar lists. I recommend avoiding cheap guardians for the same reason - if you want the option of putting them into the webway that's fine, you could do it by forcing them to take wraith upgrades OR wave serpents. Personally I think the air assault is one option the yme loc should lose access to.

I'd echo the suggestion of putting titans in troupes, say. Just because the craft world uses them a lot doesn't mean they have to be core. It will save some major headaches in moving the list forward. Also wraith knights could be troupes.

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 1:19 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 1:42 pm
Posts: 558
Location: Bundaberg, QLD, Australia
Hi All,

Thanks for popping in guys..

First off thank you for play the games on weekend, Gunslinger9, it was much appreciated. Yes he played two games on the weekend before the announcement today..

Ok that’s out of the way. Let me start by saying the following… How do we get the next generation or new players to step up to development of list when they get criticism that's not constructive or level of respect falls into the sewer for each other?

We all have different back grounds and experiences and this is a great asset to have and to pass onto the next generation or new players, in question. So where are the constructive criticisms, along with suggestions in making the list fair…So far it’s not been happening in my books ….I’m sure if someone at work did the same thing to you, you would not be happy and I gather some of you would say your mind and that would not be pretty either. So please respect each other and the person who’s Sub-AC the list..

I must say I’m keen to have the List be W/E list and have the Mymera list as the Tank list. I have spent many hours looking at this and this to me is the way to go….

I have also spent some time with Roboshadow, going over concerns I have and I gather he will take them and look at the other suggestions that have been add. Thank you to those who have left constructive criticism in positive light…..

Once again please respect each other…

_________________
Regards
Greg

*************************************************
NetEA NetERC Tournaments, Events, Campaigns and Supplements Committee Member

NetEA Eldar AC

Epic Armies: IG, Knights ATML, Eldar,Tyranids,Necrons, SM, LaTD,WD3.8,TS6.02


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 1:55 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:35 am
Posts: 2685
Is the Myrmeara list even being developed anymore?
How come Teh EpicUk list is a tank list and this one isn't? Usuallty theres some similarities between the lists.
Do we need a tank list, a titan list AND a WE list for the Eldar??

Constructive critisism:

Move titans to troupes or even better to the titans/air section.
Take out the guardian formation from the list, they do not fit the WE feel and gives the list access to a very cheap activation.
Take out the Voidspinner. That should be a BT exclusive i think.
Move falcons to core, make this a tank list like the epicUK one.

More general thoughts about list development and critique:

And yes, we do not need to be too harsh or rude. But an people shouldn't have to apologize either for having negative views about a list.
This modern thing of people thinking that critice (can't spell that) of one specific thing they do is a critice of every part of their project or even of themselves as persons is kinda disturbing. Now Roboshadow has not said anything about this but PFE200 post certainly feels like that rethoric a bit.
Is NetEA about quality (nice, balanced lists thats not OP) or quantity (lots of approved lists)? Again I think EpicUK is clearly doing the quality approach although they might be a little to conservative with adding units or changing things at times (Yme-Loc list and Minervan list being shiny examples of lists that need to be tweaked badly to work in a competitive enviroment). But the NetEA approach doesn't have to be the exact opposite right?

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 2:10 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 3:19 am
Posts: 32
PFE200 and Roboshadow were kind enough to provide an 'advanced' list to me as I had a couple of games lined up for the weekend. Battlereport -

http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=84&t=31598

Sorry, I had photo's but technology has gotten the better of me again.

Second to come.... it's a bit more of a difficult write-up as it was against Tau and ridiculously fast pace. 4 turns in about 2 hours 15 minutes....

Regards

Harry


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2016 2:11 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5302
Location: London, UK
Ok, here is my take on the changes listed at the top of this thread

  1. Phantom added to the Warhost section and given the option on weapon changes. Placing it here since they have a focus on the war engine/titans.
    Not sure about doing this. An all Eldar titan list could well be OTT, especially with singleton Revenants to hit-and-run.

  2. Warlock was add to the Warhost section, still 0-1 and no weapons upgrades
    Adding the Warlock is Fair enough as it is in keeping with the list's principle, but keep it with the other titans

  3. Copy from the UK Bonesinger...
    Fair enough, though the E-UK list does not confer EA +1 or Inspiring . . . .

  4. Add the Farseer character…
    I dislike the separate Farseer. Strongly suggest leaving it as 125 for 5 including the Farseer.
    I am also very unsure about the dismounted Guardians and Aspects, in a list supposedly majoring on vehicles, not least because this aids spamming


  5. Move the SoV from Warhost to troupe section.
    Fair enough, though it works in either section. As a craftworld troupe this does put more focus on the WE, which I presume was the intention

  6. Wraith Knight added to the 1/3 titian, spaceships and AC section…formation size is 3….stats also added.
    Interesting addition,

  7. Have the sprit gate upgrade option to the usual wraith gate. Only allowing Infantry, Walkers and AV...
    Yes

  8. May Not Garrison rule reworded to reflect for YME-LOC.
    Yes

  9. Make the selection of troupes two instead of three.
    Not sure this is necessary, though you are obviously trying to focus on the WE warhosts,


  10. Engine of Vaul Warhost size change to one W/E and the upgrades are now 200 points each...
    Tricky. This is what is in the E-UK list, though I also agree that it is open to spamming as others have mentioned.
    However, the few E-UK lists presented add at least one SOV for AA and several air units or titans, so spamming has not apparently been tried


  11. Change the Guardian troupe...
    No – see #4 above.

  12. Added Eldar hornets as scouts. Use the basic stats from UK list
    Yes,

  13. Added void spinner- Bound to be contentious. But as one of the other applicant said it nicely” Firstly, it’s the war-engine list, so they should all be available. Secondly, the fluff says “the Craftworld also possesses an arcane engine of destruction that can destroy a continent in a single night”. If they’ve got that, they’re badass enough to use Void Spinners.” And I agree. Still full 275 point each, no reduction for multiples, can’t be taken as a Warhost, but also put 0–1 Void Spinner per EoV Warhost restriction.
    Not at all sure about this. Being ‘arcane’ perhaps 0-1 per army might be a reasonable compromise, otherwise I can envisage 5x Scorpions and 5x Void Spinners – not pretty :D

  14. Added vampire hunter and stats were added…
    Not at all sure about this – the point is that it is a ground list, not an air assault list. IMO this is another contentious part

  15. Add titan weapons and stat changes (Fir list) on some of those weapons…I have also gone with no charge on weapons upgrades, bound to be contentious. Also limited the number that could be carried per titian.
    15.1. Titan D-Cannon same stats as the weapon on the cobra
    15.2. Tremor Cannon- change the BP to 3
    15.3. Star cannon- no change
    You are right, these are contentious. I suggest dropping these changes for now


  16. Change the Exarch Extra Attack to basically match the aspect type they are assigned too.
    Yes.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net