ERC on Ulthw |
Chroma
|
Post subject: ERC on Ulthw Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:15 pm |
|
Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm Posts: 9684 Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
|
Quote (Da Warboss @ 11 2005 Aug.,17:25) | If done properly I would think, despite being outnumbered 2-1, the BT could easily win. Warp Spiders, Howling Banshees, and Dark Reapers would easily destruct guardians.. |
It's not just about being out-numbered, but also out-activated. ?There's a synergistic effect going on with Ulthwe in that it has more formations, more Farseers (so more Farsight), more 1+ Initiative units, and a better Strategy Rating; each on their own isn't a big deal, but all together it's greater than the sum of the parts.
Here's the thing: I don't want to get rid of any of that! ?I like the way Ulthwe plays, it's totally my style of Eldar, but I think they're just getting away with a little too much; my play experience tells me that, and, if I remember correctly, Battlestats was telling the same story.
Has any other group done a lot of Biel-Tan vs Ulthwe fights? ?We haven't done a "pure" Aspect vs "pure" Guardian fight yet as, besides being an extreme case, it deprives Biel-Tan of two Eldar specials: the Avatar and triple-retains. ?We've done *almost* all Aspect vs predominantly Guardian, and they were close fights, but Ulthwe still won. ?
Having a Supreme Commander you can "hide" vs one that almost has to get "stuck-in" is another advantage to Ulthwe and I've lost a lot of Autarchs when using Biel-Tan and I've rarely lost a Seer Council.
_________________ "EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer
Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
|
|
Top |
|
|
MC23
|
Post subject: ERC on Ulthw Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 11:34 pm |
|
Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:27 am Posts: 174
|
Quote (Chroma @ 10 2005 Aug.,20:51) | MC23, a question: Have you played many Biel-Tan vs Ulthwe games?
What has been your experience in Eldar vs Eldar battles? | I haven't played any such games that haven't given me a true Tournament scenario feedback.
You post made me raise some questions about it. First is anything exaggerated to try to make your point? You talk both about Ulthw? winning all games versus Biel-Tan and then you mention the games where they lost.
The other thing I wonder about not talking the Revenants as I find them more needed in an Ulthw? army than Biel-Tan's, at least in Tournament scenarios. I could see not taking them in a known Eldar on Eldar fight but that's not a Tournament scenario but a targeted army. So I just want you to confirm that these lists your group are fighting with are considered well rounded versus all armies (being over exploited is still fine).
That said I don't have real physical evidence of Ulthw? out Eldar-ing Biel-Tan but I am skeptical. But I do have an anecdote on this. When I was testing out an exploitive Guardian list to demonstrate why the Farseers having a transferable Marshal rule was a bad idea (and why it never got used) I chose a Biel-Tan army over Ulthw? because using the Void Spinner was far more important than the 5+ Strategy or a SC in a formation I was taking (and Supreme Commanders are rather important). And if it matters my opponent were the Space Marines played by an extremely skilled Eldar opponent.
_________________ I am MC23
|
|
Top |
|
|
MC23
|
Post subject: ERC on Ulthw Posted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 12:00 am |
|
Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:27 am Posts: 174
|
[quote="nealhunt,11 2005 Aug.,10:37"][/quote] The point here is not designing the list. It's marketing the list.
Those suggestions are all based on managing perception in order to make it attractive and have little or nothing to do with the play balance or list design. |
First of all I'm here to design a balanced list. I'll take in considerations of perceptions but when they lead to bad decisions I will not follow it. Now if the ERC is going to tell me my experience with the army is worthless and their reading of the list is the only source expertise here I will walk away from this and from the whole EPIC community.
What you are balking over is no more than 75 points in a 3000 point army if you take a horde of guardians (7+ hosts). Realistically, it's 25-50 points in a tournament army.
Again, the goal has nothing to do with actual balance (25-50 points in 3K is nothing). It is all about managing the perception of "something for nothing." |
Do not throw away game balance so easily. But the real point I was making was that by charging this token amount (and it is just a token amount) you have completely given me a reason not to take the formation. And I won't. I'm not balking about the cost I'm balking about the option. Spending 25 points more for the Council and possibly 50 points more for 2 BG hosts might not shift their net game balance out of an acceptable range, I'll agree with. Just not that I would take BG's at +25 points given the option.
Incidentally, as a side issue, I would like to hear your thoughts on not spending 25 points for a 300-500 point formation to gain an initiative bonus which is further amplified by Farsight abilities. I would gladly pay it and call it a bargain.
I've played the army many many times, I know I wouldn't take it. Guardians are cheap and die fast. When you say you would gladly pay the price, it sounds like you are only reading the list and have never fielded Ulthw?. I find the idea a serious decision and one I would not often make.
Now giving Black Guardians their own entry opens the possibilities of changing other options on them at the same time, which I don't mind considering. Any changes to Black Guardians will however place Ulthw? firmly back into playtest status.
So Black Guardians (as is) as an optional point increase is out. A new Black Guardian formation with completely different options is fine, but they have to be something generic Guardians aren't.
_________________
I am MC23
Top |
|
|
Chroma
|
Post subject: ERC on Ulthw Posted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 12:00 am |
|
Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm Posts: 9684 Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
|
Quote (MC23 @ 11 2005 Aug.,23:34) | You post made me raise some questions about it. First is anything exaggerated to try to make your point? You talk both about Ulthw? winning all games versus Biel-Tan and then you mention the games where they lost. | For that Ulthwe loss, I meant *ever*! Other than a loss against a Lost and the Damned army (when Ulthwe had Revenants), Ulthwe is undefeated in my local play group. There have been some very close games, mainly against Imperial Guard, but they lay the smack down on every other army in our play group: Space Marines, Orks, Chaos Space Marines, and Imperial Guard.
As an Eldar player, I never take Revenants anymore. I'd rather spend the points on up gunning Guardian hosts with Wraith constructs or getting more activations. Maybe I've just had good luck with paired Scorpions or something, but I prefer them. And I've really liked Falcon Troupes.
Here's the list I'm currently using, does it look normal/balanced to you? I usually set it up as two battle groups. Occasionally I'll swap in super-heavies or air power as well.
Eldar 2700 Points (Ulthwe List) Avatar
Black Guardian Warhost 350 1 Seer Coucil 1 Farseer 3 Heavy Weapons Platforms 3 Guardians 3 Wraithguard
Black Guardian Warhost 325 1 Farseer 1 Extra Farseer 3 Heavy Weapons Platforms 3 Guardians 3 Wraithguard
Guardian Warhost 150 1 Farseer 3 Heavy Weapons Platforms 4 Guardians
Guardian Warhost 150 1 Farseer 3 Heavy Weapons Platforms 4 Guardians
Fire Prism Troupe 250 3 Fire Prisms Fire Prism Troupe 250 3 Fire Prisms Night Spinner Troupe 175 3 Night Spinners Ranger Troupe 150 6 Rangers Windrinder Troupe 200 6 Jetbikes Windrinder Troupe 200 6 Jetbikes Falcon Troupe 250 5 Falcons Falcon Troupe 250 5 Falcons
Total 2700
I play Ulthwe, I love Ulthwe, and despite all this, I *want* to pay more points for my units! That's the only point I have. And it looks like other Ulthwe players are willing to do the same. So, why not err on the side of caution? If Ulthwe winds up being the weak Eldar army in the end, so be it, it's good to have a challenge and it can always be reviewed in the Rules Review.
_________________ "EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer
Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
|
|
Top |
|
|
nealhunt
|
Post subject: ERC on Ulthw Posted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 3:34 pm |
|
Purestrain |
|
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm Posts: 9617 Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
Quote (MC23 @ 12 2005 Aug.,00:00) | | Now if the ERC is going to tell me my experience with the army is worthless and their reading of the list is the only source expertise here I will walk away from this and from the whole EPIC community. |
No one said or implied anything of the sort.
Now giving Black Guardians their own entry opens the possibilities of changing other options on them at the same time, which I don't mind considering. |
I think you misunderstood. As far as I know, no one is proposing additional changes. It's just editorial.
The BG options are already different from the basic host. A separate listing instead of having multiple "...or Black Guardians may take..." qualifiers would make it easier to follow.
When you say you would gladly pay the price, it sounds like you are only reading the list and have never fielded Ulthw?. I find the idea a serious decision and one I would not often make.
I haven't commanded the list, however, I do have first hand experience. I have played against it many times and watched it in action in a few games I was not involved in.
As far as my comments about gladly paying the price, it was a general reference. In any army, I would usually pay 25 points for a +1 to activate a largish formation. For Eldar who can not only use the +1 but also get the Farsight bonuses, as I said, it's approaching "no brainer" status for me.
I've played the army many many times, I know I wouldn't take it. Guardians are cheap and die fast.
Black Guardians? I nearly always see them fielded with multiple upgrades, meaning they are neither cheap, not die fast. As I noted, they are usually in the 300-500 point range. In my last game against them, the commander's host was mounted, with falcons, for a total cost of 550 points and the other BG host was in Wave Serpents for a total of 350.
I'm not trying to be beligerent. I am really and truly boggled by your comments because they are completely at odds with everything I've ever seen in play.
I would really like to hear more detail on what considerations would drive you to abandon BGs for regular guardians and how it would change your overall army composition.
yme-loc
|
Post subject: ERC on Ulthw Posted: Thu Aug 18, 2005 3:34 pm |
|
Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 4:58 pm Posts: 599
|
Quote (nealhunt @ 18 2005 Aug.,14:06) | my main problem with the ulthwe list is still the availability and flexibility of the aspect troupes. |
Can you explain this? ?I would rather see 2 4-unit formations coming at me than a sinlge 8-unit formation any day of the week.
Extra activations - I don't believe there is an adavantage to speak of. ?Using your example lists, the air strikes combine 3 formations into 1 activation. ?Likely, one of the troupes will be broken and/or destroyed by the assault. ?Any that aren't will break with only modest amounts of fire due to casualties from the assault, size, and mostly modest armor saves. ?Personally, if I were counting activations, I wouldn't count all 6 air assault formations as more than 3 total activations becasue anything beyond that is probably broken or destroyed.
Flexibility - Troupes provide extra flexibility, but they are far, far more fragile. ?They also lose the 2xInspiring assault once the initial air assault is over. ?A host reduced to 3 stands/2 Exarchs remains a real threat, which is simply not true of a shattered troupe with, at most, 1 Exarch.
We've all seen the Assault Marines bemoaned for exactly the same kinds of weaknesses outlined above, i.e. they are too fragile and the only way to get their points back is via an air assault and after that they are near worthless. ?SM players have practically begged for a way to bulk up the formation, but claims about Ulthwe are that the mini-formation is better.
There is a major disconnect somewhere. | Regarding extra activations, initially both lists have the same number of activations 10, but after the initial strike the ulthwe list will have 14 (probaly 12 or 13 as some of the troupes break, although I am counting on leaving one troupe of swooping hawks back for the third turn) to Biel-Tans 11 (although even aspect warhosts break quite often so maybe 10).
Regarding four man troupes breaking, yep its pretty much bound to happen, but not until after their initial strike and certaily not until after they have dished a world of pain on some happless enemy formation.
But importantly broken doesn't mean destroyed, with the troupes small size most shooting will either be complete overkill (keeping fire off other targets, and which would have broken a warhost anyway) or will leave one or two stands left alive which if they rally can be used later to dispute objectives.
The problem with the aspects and certainly with regards the assault marine comparison, comes down to two points. Firstly flexibility, there are alot of different aspects and many of them can be used for different purposes to assault marines even in very small numbers, especially when combined with eldar special abilities (swooping hawks with their scout ability for disputing multiple objectives, setting up supported assaults with shining spears, dark reapers winning an initial assault while the troupe in front of them takes the casualties and then consolidating into cover ready to sustain fire next turn e.t.c)
Secondly its a matter of pure killing power, two dire avenger troupes with exarchs in a vampire can break a big or huge ork warband in a single assault, what happens to those dire avengers afer that (maybe some survive to support next turn or generally threaten objectives) is just a bonus.
_________________ Epic UK - Improving and Enhancing Epic Gaming in the UK [url]http://epic-uk.co.uk/wp[/url]
|