| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Fir Iolarion Titan Clan 4.2.6 http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=33648 |
Page 3 of 5 |
| Author: | Mrdiealot [ Thu Oct 04, 2018 4:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fir Iolarion Titan Clan 4.2.6 |
Norto took a formation of the 4.2.6 Wraithknights in our recent game with CW Lugganath. They were equipped with the dual Wraithcannons as this seems to be the most effective loadout. Overall they seem a bit fragile, but then again they were set up front and centre, making them an easy target. I'd advocate for a 5++ save and a 5+ Holofield on them. |
|
| Author: | PFE200 [ Thu Oct 04, 2018 10:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fir Iolarion Titan Clan 4.2.6 |
Gunslinger9 wrote: Could initially the current ones just be left Holofield (3) which would be no change? That would allow people to do other stuff with Knights, and work out Reverents/Phantoms/Warlocks later....maybe even Engines of Vaul... Regards Harry Yes that true too..but I still feel the Revenants can do with a tweak.. 
|
|
| Author: | scarik [ Fri Jun 21, 2019 9:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fir Iolarion Titan Clan 4.2.6 |
Well its been forever but I have more thoughts and would like feedback. 1) Holofield (x) Has anyone managed to play this idea? I have and I find that anything other than 3+ needs that RA back up. Revs and Knights without RA fall apart under fire with weaker Holos in the games I have played. I often find myself testing against Steel Legion so my worry is both sniper TK and heavy AT volume. Weaker fields makes Shadowswords much more deadly regardless of RA but since they can be novaburned by Revs I don't mind. AT fire from Lemans vs Rev Twins is horrifying and while I don't see anything wrong with a Sustain within 45cm from them breaking my Twins, the fact that usually they just kill the formation has been disheartening and the Lemans can generally break Revs at will with a 4+ save. My goal isn't to laugh off that kind of firepower, just to have a chance at making my opponent use 2 formations to ruin my day. 2) Knights I find the load outs to be fairly balanced though what I keep seeing and hearing is that the Wraithcannons are the best. FF MW is pretty badass but given its a bigger version of what wraithguard have I feel that is what it needs to be. Suncannons are a little lackluster due to the fact that you really don't need Knights to be staying at 45cm and shooting. You want to get that MW FF support or the TK CC attack. Anyone have an opinion on increasing them to AP 3+/AT4+ and dropping them to 3 attacks? I think keeping 4 and thus having the same number and strength of attacks as a Phantom with 2 Titan Suncannons is too much even with reduced range so the wiggle room is narrow here. Points should probably go back to 375 as well. 350 puts them at the same cost as Wriathlords with similar toughness, better shooting, way better movement and better Assault and Support options. 3) Wraithlords I love Lord Harriers. They run at the enemy and burn, burn, burn until they die. I especially enjoy air assaulting them in a Vampire Hunter with Knights or Revs nearby to support. Its an expensive setup but so satisfyingly effective. Once on the ground the harriers go for the Blitz and try to survive on it. Harbingers make great blitz guards though I have received complaints about their AA. The reasoning seems to be that the formation is much more resilient than similar AA formations and that you can include them in Harrier formations to push your umbrella forward. My thought is that the actual effectiveness of the AA is limited. 4 shots at 6+ is nothing like a Hydra battery's 6 at 5+. Shooting at grrund targets is similarly weak with 2/3rds as many shots at -1 each to hit. Resilience is really their entire point and the AA mainly provides some protection against air attack against the back field or allows Lords and Knights to move away from their Titans. I'll keep playing and I hope to get a Batrep done this weekend. |
|
| Author: | ultrasalem [ Tue Jul 07, 2020 3:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fir Iolarion Titan Clan 4.2.6 |
Hi all. I've collected some epic Eldar that I'd had as a kid, plus some that I wished I'd had. Which was pretty much just a couple of titans and a few original knights. So this list was the best option for fielding those models. Can't say much about balance yet as we're still learning the game here, but it's been fun so far. |
|
| Author: | scarik [ Fri Jun 25, 2021 2:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fir Iolarion Titan Clan 4.2.6 |
Been a long time since I rock and rolled but with the Covid19 restrictionsargely ended here I have started getting more games in. I'm going to do a new pass on the rules and see if it's time for a new version. |
|
| Author: | Hellebore [ Mon Aug 23, 2021 11:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fir Iolarion Titan Clan 4.2.6 |
Hi all. I had been keen on a titan clan myself and did up my own army list, until someone pointed this one out. Curious as to why the rules for the battle titans didn't use those in the appendix in the swordwind supplement? |
|
| Author: | scarik [ Tue Aug 24, 2021 3:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fir Iolarion Titan Clan 4.2.6 |
Hellebore wrote: Hi all. I had been keen on a titan clan myself and did up my own army list, until someone pointed this one out. Curious as to why the rules for the battle titans didn't use those in the appendix in the swordwind supplement? Can you be more specific? The titan stats are in line with the standard Epic rules. Thr main difference is greater weapon options. |
|
| Author: | Hellebore [ Tue Aug 24, 2021 4:07 am ] | ||
| Post subject: | Re: Fir Iolarion Titan Clan 4.2.6 | ||
scarik wrote: Hellebore wrote: Hi all. I had been keen on a titan clan myself and did up my own army list, until someone pointed this one out. Curious as to why the rules for the battle titans didn't use those in the appendix in the swordwind supplement? Can you be more specific? The titan stats are in line with the standard Epic rules. Thr main difference is greater weapon options. Hey Scarik. I was referring to the stats for phantom weapons published in Swordwind at the back along with some stats for old minis that they weren't selling any more. They had stats for the D-cannon, tremor cannon and heat lance.
|
|||
| Author: | IJW Wartrader [ Tue Aug 24, 2021 9:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fir Iolarion Titan Clan 4.2.6 |
There are stats for all of those, they just don’t use the exact same stats as were listed in Swordwind. |
|
| Author: | Hellebore [ Tue Aug 24, 2021 10:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fir Iolarion Titan Clan 4.2.6 |
IJW Wartrader wrote: There are stats for all of those, they just don’t use the exact same stats as were listed in Swordwind. Yeah I was wondering why the official rules weren't used. |
|
| Author: | IJW Wartrader [ Tue Aug 24, 2021 10:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fir Iolarion Titan Clan 4.2.6 |
Because they were just suggestions for non-tournament games. From memory, they were found to be badly unbalanced when the Fir Iolarian list was being playtested. |
|
| Author: | jimmyzimms [ Tue Aug 24, 2021 1:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fir Iolarion Titan Clan 4.2.6 |
Hellebore wrote: Yeah I was wondering why the official rules weren't used. None of that was official. They were simply suggestions for collectors that wanted to use their 2nd edition titans and knight models. They did the same with many of the Leman Russ variants that never got anything official. They were starting points for use but play testing ultimately was the decider on balance. This was especially true for the eldar weapons which are stupid OP |
|
| Author: | scarik [ Tue Aug 24, 2021 5:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fir Iolarion Titan Clan 4.2.6 |
What they said. Playtesting showed that they were unbalanced one way or another as well as being too similar in some cases. As they are currently they are much more balanced and each one has a distinct role. |
|
| Author: | Hellebore [ Wed Aug 25, 2021 12:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fir Iolarion Titan Clan 4.2.6 |
scarik wrote: What they said. Playtesting showed that they were unbalanced one way or another as well as being too similar in some cases. As they are currently they are much more balanced and each one has a distinct role. Ok fair enough. It's a shame because they were distinctly different (except I suppose the tremor cannon). The heat lance worked more like it did in previous editions. The current playtest one is just the imperial melta cannon, rather than a long range pinpoint lance. Is there a reason you gave it 0-1? The titan legion list can, if I'm reading it correctly, have a warlord titan with 4 of them. Is there a reason that the eldar can't have more than one melta cannon? One thing I miss with the tremor cannon (and tried to emulate in my own list) was the fact it was a straight line and hit everything under it. Rather than trying to make it compete with a pulsar, perhaps it's worth looking at it as an army disruption tool? The way I look at the titan weapons seem like this: D cannon - short range - most powerful anti titan weapon, as they ignore shields/fields pulsar - long range - tactical option, good against lots of things but not great heat lance - medium range - TK weapon, pin point but less powerful the further away you go Tremor cannon - long range - army disruption weapon, not super deadly, but impacts the enemy army more than other weapons Perhaps the challenge for me is that the eldar have generally been made distinct due to their rules exceptions rather than just brute imperial force. IE the d -cannon does damage directly to DC rather than playing by the shield rules, or the tremor cannon hits multiple formations rather than just the one you targeted. so something like: d cannon - 45cm 3BP, MW, D, Distort* *Distort - the unit under the central hole of the template automatically loses 1 Damage Capacity (this is applied directly the the DC rather than going through armour, shields etc) in addition to normal attacks Tremour - 75cm MW3+ D, IC, tremor** **Tremor - every formation crossed by the shot's line of fire receives a blast marker. I've also been toying with a monofilament barrage weapon for the phantom as well, which I'm going to print and add to my own. A more anti infantry weapon than the others. What are your thoughts on adding Skathach wraithknights to the list, or normal eldar infantry as support? |
|
| Author: | scarik [ Wed Aug 25, 2021 2:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Fir Iolarion Titan Clan 4.2.6 |
Hellebore wrote: Is there a reason you gave it 0-1? The titan legion list can, if I'm reading it correctly, have a warlord titan with 4 of them. Is there a reason that the eldar can't have more than one melta cannon? One thing I miss with the tremor cannon (and tried to emulate in my own list) was the fact it was a straight line and hit everything under it. Rather than trying to make it compete with a pulsar, perhaps it's worth looking at it as an army disruption tool? To avoid Phantoms having multiple FF TK attacks is one reason, but I'm not wedded to the idea and I'm planning a 5.0 list revamp as is so if you have notes I am happy to hear them. Hellebore wrote: D cannon - short range - most powerful anti titan weapon, as they ignore shields/fields pulsar - long range - tactical option, good against lots of things but not great heat lance - medium range - TK weapon, pin point but less powerful the further away you go Tremor cannon - long range - army disruption weapon, not super deadly, but impacts the enemy army more than other weapons Perhaps the challenge for me is that the eldar have generally been made distinct due to their rules exceptions rather than just brute imperial force. IE the d -cannon does damage directly to DC rather than playing by the shield rules, or the tremor cannon hits multiple formations rather than just the one you targeted. Fair points. Hellebore wrote: d cannon - 45cm 3BP, MW, D, Distort* *Distort - the unit under the central hole of the template automatically loses 1 Damage Capacity (this is applied directly the the DC rather than going through armour, shields etc) in addition to normal attacks Tremour - 75cm MW3+ D, IC, tremor** **Tremor - every formation crossed by the shot's line of fire receives a blast marker. You will find the community is largely allergic to adding more special rules. But if there is a way to adapt an existing rule things are fair game. I don't recall anything that ignores shields other than being in Base Contact during an assault, so that would be a hard sell. For instance I had an idea of letting the Tremor Cannon use the big templates that Spacecraft use instead of the small ones. That would make it easier to hit multiple units. Hellebore wrote: I've also been toying with a monofilament barrage weapon for the phantom as well, which I'm going to print and add to my own. A more anti infantry weapon than the others. What are your thoughts on adding Skathach wraithknights to the list, or normal eldar infantry as support? Currently the Tremor Cannon is a monster against infantry due to Ignore Cover, and the Titan Suncannon is good at range though a lot of the time that weapon still feels a bit weak in general due to being on a 750+ point model. I'm open to having better knight options, though this is meant to be primarily a titan list so we can't have too many knights. Regular eldar support was dropped several iterations ago for the fact that it took away from the titans. But something does need to happen because as is there's really only two good, 3000pt lists I've found with the current options. |
|
| Page 3 of 5 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|