Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

THE KITCHEN SINK
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=73&t=32146
Page 2 of 3

Author:  carlisimo109 [ Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:46 am ]
Post subject:  Re: THE KITCHEN SINK

jimmyzimms wrote:
Random question, is such a thing interesting for other factions? Like a Guard one for instance? Just wondering...


I think the appeal is going to highest for new players who don’t feel comfortable moving beyond the existing lists – especially those who’ve started buying things here and there and don’t have the right numbers for the usual formations. If that’s who you’re targeting, then a kitchen sink list would throw out “X support formations per company” limits and give broader ranges like 2-6 Predators @65 pts each (it doesn’t have to add up to the exact values in the main lists). And because of the support formation limits, it’d be even more valuable for non-Astartes armies.

We’d probably want to encourage players using these lists to play missions from the various supplements people here have written. Get creative when taking a non-standard army instead of playing the same ol’ Tournament Scenario with potentially unbalanced lists.

Author:  Mattman [ Sat Feb 25, 2017 3:29 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: THE KITCHEN SINK

This is something I could get behind, a bit of flexibility in detachment sizes.
Have infantry detachments start at 4 models, with upgrade options to go to 6. Vehicle detachments could start at 3 and go to 5 etc.

carlisimo109 wrote:
jimmyzimms wrote:
Random question, is such a thing interesting for other factions? Like a Guard one for instance? Just wondering...


I think the appeal is going to highest for new players who don’t feel comfortable moving beyond the existing lists – especially those who’ve started buying things here and there and don’t have the right numbers for the usual formations. If that’s who you’re targeting, then a kitchen sink list would throw out “X support formations per company” limits and give broader ranges like 2-6 Predators @65 pts each (it doesn’t have to add up to the exact values in the main lists). And because of the support formation limits, it’d be even more valuable for non-Astartes armies.

We’d probably want to encourage players using these lists to play missions from the various supplements people here have written. Get creative when taking a non-standard army instead of playing the same ol’ Tournament Scenario with potentially unbalanced lists.

Author:  jimmyzimms [ Sat Feb 25, 2017 3:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: THE KITCHEN SINK

You already can do that (in all lists regardless-JJ even wrote that in bold in the rulebook). This document is guideline for a shake and bake force with a modicum of logic and not a strict FOC. I'm not interested in making inumerable structural changes for infinite flexibility for every possible combination as it's a time suck and would end up with a document 20 pages long and frankly not needed (at some point you have to 'own' your list and do a wee bit of thinking when building your own force).


You want 4 stand tactical formations? Kick ass. Divide the cost by 6 then multiply by 4, k? :) Want 6 stand devestators? Divide by 4 and multiply by 6 to get that cost instead. Want Predators and Land Raider in a 6 strong formation? Knock yourself out.

As long as your opponent is happy you should be happy. (e.g. Don't be a dick and everything is kosher :) )

Author:  jimmyzimms [ Sat Feb 25, 2017 3:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: THE KITCHEN SINK

Added a new version in the OP explaining how to do a shake and bake custom formations. In addition added the assault ram stats and an table explaining which list has the stats for the indicated unit type.

Author:  SpeakerToMachines [ Sun Feb 26, 2017 10:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: THE KITCHEN SINK

jimmyzimms wrote:
You already can do that (in all lists regardless-JJ even wrote that in bold in the rulebook). This document is guideline for a shake and bake force with a modicum of logic and not a strict FOC. I'm not interested in making inumerable structural changes for infinite flexibility for every possible combination as it's a time suck and would end up with a document 20 pages long and frankly not needed (at some point you have to 'own' your list and do a wee bit of thinking when building your own force).

You want 4 stand tactical formations? Kick ass. Divide the cost by 6 then multiply by 4, k? :) Want 6 stand devestators? Divide by 4 and multiply by 6 to get that cost instead. Want Predators and Land Raider in a 6 strong formation? Knock yourself out.

When pricing formations, I'd recommend costing the naked activation separately, at (say) 50 points. So, 6 devastators should cost (250-50)/4*6+50 = 350. A formation is never valuable in direct proportion to its size (unless you're an Ork and has formation-size-dependent special rules).

jimmyzimms wrote:
As long as your opponent is happy you should be happy. (e.g. Don't be a dick and everything is kosher :) )


Always sound advice!

Author:  carlisimo109 [ Tue Feb 28, 2017 3:02 am ]
Post subject:  Re: THE KITCHEN SINK

jimmyzimms wrote:
I'm not interested in making inumerable structural changes for infinite flexibility for every possible combination as it's a time suck and would end up with a document 20 pages long and frankly not needed (at some point you have to 'own' your list and do a wee bit of thinking when building your own force).


Are you saying you're going to make me take units in whole number increments? This is an outrage! ;D

But I must admit, I totally missed JJ's quote, and after years of looking at lists I forgot that it was possible to play EA without following them.

Author:  Nitpick [ Fri Mar 03, 2017 10:16 am ]
Post subject:  Re: THE KITCHEN SINK

SpeakerToMachines wrote:
jimmyzimms wrote:
You already can do that (in all lists regardless-JJ even wrote that in bold in the rulebook). This document is guideline for a shake and bake force with a modicum of logic and not a strict FOC. I'm not interested in making inumerable structural changes for infinite flexibility for every possible combination as it's a time suck and would end up with a document 20 pages long and frankly not needed (at some point you have to 'own' your list and do a wee bit of thinking when building your own force).

You want 4 stand tactical formations? Kick ass. Divide the cost by 6 then multiply by 4, k? :) Want 6 stand devestators? Divide by 4 and multiply by 6 to get that cost instead. Want Predators and Land Raider in a 6 strong formation? Knock yourself out.

When pricing formations, I'd recommend costing the naked activation separately, at (say) 50 points. So, 6 devastators should cost (250-50)/4*6+50 = 350. A formation is never valuable in direct proportion to its size (unless you're an Ork and has formation-size-dependent special rules).

jimmyzimms wrote:
As long as your opponent is happy you should be happy. (e.g. Don't be a dick and everything is kosher :) )


Always sound advice!

Hmm. This is becoming awfully similar to a game I once played... Wonderful encouragement for those of us less inclined to bother with the tournament thing.

Author:  jimmyzimms [ Fri Mar 03, 2017 1:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: THE KITCHEN SINK

;D
I know! It's almost like we supposed to be having fun or something!

Author:  Mattman [ Tue Mar 07, 2017 11:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: THE KITCHEN SINK

I don't mind having a play around with writing an all encompassing list if someone can send me some editable word files to play around with.

Matt

Author:  jimmyzimms [ Sat Sep 23, 2017 8:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: THE KITCHEN SINK

Anyone try this beast out on a lark?
:spin :sos :whistle

Author:  Abetillo [ Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: THE KITCHEN SINK

If i had Marines at hand i would, as I am always up for peculiar lists, ... but not at the moment.

Also, as it looks that your intention is to have all the units from the E:A SM lists, how about adding the Thunderhawk Close Air Support from Scions of Iron? There is also an small typo: it is typed as Thunderhawk Bomber from Scions of Iron in some places but it is Thunderhawk Saturation Bomber, like you wrote on others.

Thanks for the work.The part about telling from which list is which uncommon unit is very useful.

Author:  jimmyzimms [ Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: THE KITCHEN SINK

The formation is just called TBrick Bomber here. The unit is TBrick Saturation Bomber (second column) which is the uniform part of EA lists.

Good catch on the TBrick CAS. Adding.

Author:  jimmyzimms [ Fri Jan 15, 2021 3:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: THE KITCHEN SINK

Now that there's enough of Primaris stuff out there I was thinking of adding some options for it. I'm not at all interested in getting into insane detail with the forces but instead tweak some of the comperable traditional units with a little extra ooomph to represent their tougher/newer status.

So meaning representing Intercessors would be a Tactical unit but give a boost. Hellblasters basically Devestators but again, with a little more punch.

Instead of +1 all the stats (like most attempts did, which I think end up working against their viability in the end by making the force cost too much and lack enough activations) I was thinking instead of formation level boosts. For instance, Primaris marines shed a BM automatically (representing their toughness) and maybe TRA (to reflect their better armour) in certain situations (or just period, not really sure). We'd treat this as an upgrade, not a unit. Something REALLY simple to implement.

Similarly for their basic vehicles as well. Treat an Impulsor as a Rhino but add in Skimmer. Gladiator is just mechanically a Predator but with skimmer. Of course there's some unique stuff out there such as the Astraeus which would have to be it's own thing but those are rare cases.

Thoughts?

Author:  jimmyzimms [ Fri Jun 25, 2021 12:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: THE KITCHEN SINK

Don't hate me. I added Primaris garbage yesterday :(

Author:  Ardias03 [ Tue Jul 27, 2021 7:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: THE KITCHEN SINK

for a straight port, maybe adding "walker" instead? The Repulsor could be played by the Land Raider at least to start with, but I do think some Primaris-specific vehicles would be good:

- Repulsor
.....Las/Las loadout (Land Raider w/ Walker, drop the HB)
.....Gatling/HB loadout (Land Raider w/ walker, drop the twin lascannon, add Half a Vulkan Megabolter)

- Executioner
.....Plasma Incenerator (Hammerhead Ion Cannon?), Gatling, TL HB, Icarus defense (1x 5+ AA)
.....Laser Destroyer (vanquisher cannon? destroyer tank hunter?), gatling, TL HB, Icarus defense

Impulsor (upgrades?)
..... Shield (Reinforced Armor? Invuln?)
..... Icarus Defense

I'm still thinking about Astraeus stats, but it's a weird beast.

Page 2 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/