Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 65 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Necron list: Issues

 Post subject: Re: Necron list: Issues
PostPosted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 5:41 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 9:15 am
Posts: 1832
Location: Oslo, Norway
Steve54 wrote:
I would say this tweek to LM was on a par with the changes to pulse or spirit stones for BT eldar - small changes to a disliked special rule


That's my experience as well. Reading it for the first time it seemed huge, but after playing with it for a while the effect isn't as drastic. It's still a downgrade, but a warranted one (IMHO) and I just think it's better for the game.

Do note that my proposed rule also affects Lance (which the EUK doesn't). I don't think it's right that MW negates a save and that Lance doesn't.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Necron list: Issues
PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 10:57 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
kyussinchains wrote:
Moscovian wrote:
kyussinchains wrote:
LOADS of changes have been made to the chaos and marine lists without them being pushed back to developmental, ...


I would consider that a mistake on the part of the ERC for not addressing that rather than a precedent being set.


perhaps, although nobody has complained particularly loudly about it, indeed I think most feedback has been largely positive, if the ERC had flexed its collective muscles and put a stop to it, that would have been a negative step and I'm very glad it hasn't happened


Sounds to me like everything worked out, but there is no way to know that beforehand. Hindsight is 20/20. Where you say it was a good move, I say you got lucky. The changes (whatever they were) could have sucked and then you would have had a whole group of people freaking out for making changes to an approved list and calling its Mr. Hyde doppelganger approved.

This isn't about flexing muscles - it's about doing what we feel is right for the players who want to pick up a list and play and KNOW it is tested. I can't tell you how many emails I received when Raiders 1.0 first came out complaining how they wished the Necron list was better tested. They didn't complain about the list, just the length of time it took to go from development to print.

Right now, the ERC is quite divided, and with the votes not in yet I'd say the ERC could easily allow the changes and keep the approved status. We'll see soon enough.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Necron list: Issues
PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:39 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 11:43 pm
Posts: 2556
Location: UK
I thought it was agreed that the protocol would be that the compendium and tournament pack would always represent the best version of a list (in this case Approved), and then each year a new list could be submitted (having playtested the changes). Then if that new list is Approved, it replaces the previous one. No?

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Necron list: Issues
PostPosted: Mon Sep 30, 2013 3:10 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 9:15 am
Posts: 1832
Location: Oslo, Norway
The ERC wants more testing. The Raiders list will stay as it is for now, I'll put up something about more playtests.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Necron list: Issues
PostPosted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 5:39 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:32 pm
Posts: 695
Location: Geneva, Swizerland
Moscovian wrote:
kyussinchains wrote:
Moscovian wrote:
kyussinchains wrote:
LOADS of changes have been made to the chaos and marine lists without them being pushed back to developmental, ...


I would consider that a mistake on the part of the ERC for not addressing that rather than a precedent being set.


perhaps, although nobody has complained particularly loudly about it, indeed I think most feedback has been largely positive, if the ERC had flexed its collective muscles and put a stop to it, that would have been a negative step and I'm very glad it hasn't happened


Sounds to me like everything worked out, but there is no way to know that beforehand. Hindsight is 20/20. Where you say it was a good move, I say you got lucky. The changes (whatever they were) could have sucked and then you would have had a whole group of people freaking out for making changes to an approved list and calling its Mr. Hyde doppelganger approved.

[quote]

As I have stated many times, our playgroup greatly disapproves of some of the Black legion changes, which have just gone through, as expected...

The removal of the WE heavy options is regrettable

_________________
"War is not about who is right, but about who is left". - B. Russell


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 65 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


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