Hey guys,

Following a PM, the ERC had some discussion on this. We all agreed that we'd like weapons with the same name to have the same stats. In terms of what this means for you guys:

If you're developing a list talk with your AC about stats, ideally all "Weapon X"s should be the same. If you're looking to test something different, and your AC agrees, "Weapon X" should be renamed to differentiate.

The Plasma Cannon (Steel Legion/DKoK vs Minervan) and Gatling Blaster (SM/IG vs AMTL) are being addressed, and I'm hunting through the TP for others like them.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

just to clarify something, does this go hand in hand with general discouraging of inventing new weapon names?

ie. you want to give a plane with a twin lascannon a slightly different range or to hit value based on balance, would renaming it to 'razor laser' be frowned on as a cheap cop out, or is this the approach that is being encouraged?

_________________
NetEA Space Marine, Imperial Fists and Blood Angels Army Champion

NetEA Red Corsairs Army Champion

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

It was always a silly idea that has led to pointless twisting around stats and usage down the line - especially where AA abilities are added.

We already do this with non standard variants of units. e.g. Devestator vs Salamander Devestator

I don't care what the unit / weapon is called but the ability to play with values independently is important. Of course reworking a Multi-melta to be say, longer range is to be discouraged but equipping one unit with an Autocannon and another with a Long Barrel Autocannon is fine. After all, both actually exist in the larger scales.

Wherever possible we should stay with the existing weapons but there's actual weapons that are specific to a unit then we should have the freedom to incorporate the unit specific version. The Baneblade battle cannon is actually a distinct weapon from the Battle Cannon despite being named the same originally in EA.

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

Doesn't sound feasible - EpicA had always allowed weapons with the same name top have different stats; look at twin Heavy Bolters. Two different stats in the Thunderhawk itself, plus adherent stats again on the Marauder or various ground units.

Hadn't realised the Minnervan Plasma Cannons were different, the show firing ones probably would be a pain to track in large numbers.

Please lets change the Gatling Blaster to have the 6 shots it has in the TL list? It's what the AMTL AC wants and the change had popular support. The Warlord has long been known to be underpowered for it's cost and rarely used and this small boost would help.

Can we get the twin Lascannons on the Squat Leviathan to have 45cm? Like every other ground one has (including the Leviathan in the Cadian list) rather than the 30cm it oddly has now. I've suggested this in the Squat development thread ages ago but been ignored.

IIRC the warlord would coat +25 points under the current approved list.

I would like it standardized universally as well but as I understand it the 4 shots without price increase is the compromise in the ERC concerning the discrepancy. They were unable to come to agreement on that, no? Someone on ERC/Vaaish can correct me if I'm wrong here...

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

@kyussinchains - That's really the AC's call. Personally, if the change is in the name of internal balance I'd be fine with it, so long as point tweaking options have been exhausted. So, cop out up until that point I guess, for me.

@GlynG - I'm less worried about the Twin Heavy Bolter example, that has more to do with how the weapon is mounted. If people are really having a tough time with it we'll look at renaming them.

On the GB, how about tests before clamoring "the change is needed"? The Warlord being underpowered has more to do with activation parity than missing out on 2 shots. No one's going to start taking Warlords all of a sudden with the change, that argument is a red herring.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

I agree it will do nothing to make them suddenly worthwhile. It only has the benefit of making things consistent.

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

I would argue consistency would be achieved by moving the outlier inline with everything else, not the other way around.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

I understand the activation parity is the main issue with the Warlord, but it's not the whole picture. The Warlock costs slightly more than the Warlord yet is still taken reasonably often (roughly 25% used in Epic-UK Biel-tan lists). I don't think anyone thinks giving the Gatling Blaster +2 shots would make a huge difference to how often it would be used, but it would make a small difference and help some, while not being too drastic a change for opponents. Backgroundwise Warlords are the most numerous titan class in the Imperium but you wouldn't think that from epic. I believe I also posted trying to query if the 6 shot GB was definitely vetoed by the ERC or if you if it was not till good amount of testing. I offered to playtest it if it might make a difference and suggested others couldto but no one answered on your stance so nothing happened.

The gun on the Krieg Medusa Platform will need a name tweak. Rename it "Medusa (indirect)", "Modified Medusa", "Krieg Medusa" or whatever you feel like. The 40k Medusa Platform has a modified version of the weapon, mounted to also have the capability to fire indirectly at reasonably long range, which the 40k vehicle mounted Medusa doesn't have. The Epic Krieg list represents this too with the weapon having two fire modes. The Krieg Medusa is a more powerful unit in Epic, but thoroughly tested over the years and costed appropriately (275 compared to 150 for vehicle Medusas) and the good indirect barrage it has is a key part of Krieg gunline based armies tactics.

You're going to have issues with Heavy Flamers too, this one has been discussed before. Epic-UK consistently give all units with Heavy Flamers ignore cover for their FF attacks. Net-EA often does, but not consistently. Epic-UK Stormsword has ignore cover FF for example, while Net-EA one doesn't.

I would point out Mole Mortars.



AFAIK, EpicA has never allowed weapons with the same name have differente stats. HB in Thunderhawks and Marauders are perfectly fine, different mountings.

_________________
Epic Armageddon in Spanish (from Spain): http://www.box.net/shared/3u5vr8a370

Konig Armoured Regiment FanList: https://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd ... 41#p581941

TBH Glyn, who wouldn't choose an increase for no points? Forcing a change on a weapon across different lists to satisfy its usage in one other particular list isn't great grounds to increase all the other lists' weapons.

it's +25 points for that load out in AMTL

Warlord 725
TLD +25
TLD +25
GB +25
VC +50
===================
850 points

Warlord (4shot GB)
825 points

I think the consistency more than outweighs the change but I'm just some schmo that works here

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

History - Actually the WL in the Marine list was dropped by 25 points to allow a WL + Thunderbolt combo to be bought when the Tb was increased in price, so the AMTL is paying the original pricing. The -25 points was also done in hope the WL would be taken more but 25 points is minimal and the points sink in a WL is the issue.

I would prefer to see the IG and Marines lists fall in line with the AMTL version of the GB personally. I don't believe the added 2x shots will do anything to change the attractiveness (or lack thereof) of the Warlord and only slightly impact it's capabilities. However, making and testing that change is up to the IG and Marine list AC's if and when they feel it should be pursued.

Until then, we do have a bit of an awkward point where the GB has been tested and functions quite well in the AMTL list with the +2 shots, but the other lists will lag, potentially for the foreseeable future. I don't think changing the GB back is the way to go, so we'll change the name a bit.

I'd considered "The One True Gatling Blaster" but since that could be a bit inflammatory, we'll just change it to "Mars Pattern Gatling Blaster" and chalk the extra shots up to superior construction over the Lucius pattern until the STC's make it to the rest of the Imperium.

_________________
-Vaaish