I still see no reason to take the Tauros. The Twin Multilaser of the Tauros Venator is superior to the Tauros' Tauros Grenade Launcher. And both cost the same!

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

A point I made 2 months ago. It hasn't been addressed, probably for the same reason I haven't played them: real life.

With that said, there are some big time balance issues that have IMO taken the list backwards. Can't be helped I suppose with the introduction of the new units.

And, yes, I am still annoyed that Support Sentinels are removed. The argument to remove them doesn't hold any water for me. We're going remove them to match IA8, yet also acknowledge that the Support Sentinels were removed probably because the models didn't sell? Beh.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

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

You should know by now that it takes patience to work with my lists. I always do things in bite sized chunks and refine. Then test, then refine. Hence the high levels of insanity associated with my projects.

So we'll get there. In the meantime, we are testing Disrupt on the Tauros Grenade Launcher. Please feel free to do the same.



Well, don't leave me in suspense. Please do share your observations.



Unfortunately, I don't really think anything I say is going to make you feel better about the decision. I stated very early on in this exercise when IA3 was the model, that the book was going to provide the framework for how the list was developed. Like the decision or not, I have strived to be consistent with my list approach.

What I will not do is make the list something that it is not.

I have offered to develop campaign sets so that those who really do prefer the IA3 version of the list could continue to use that model. That solution didn't agree with you and that's fine, less work for me. However, there is nothing preventing you from using the earlier version. This version is still being tested and will for some time.

I did the very same thing when the Tau list moved from v4.0 to the v4.4 that nobody seemed to like. No one is going to force you to play a list you don't like, least of all me.

_________________
Remember Taros? We do.

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

For mysterious reasons that have nothing to do with me becoming likely to collect an army of them in Epic to match my 40k army, I'm becoming interested in this list again. Sorry.

I've made my peace with the whole teleport thing. :-)


Here are the issues I can see with the list without needing to playtest it.
I intend to playtest it for you at a future point.


================


Thoughts:

In the hands of a top player, Iron Discipline is probably broken-powerful.
The ability to inhibit the enemy's chance of rallying whilst having no drawback of your own is massive.
I suggest removing it as a rule.

Core companies: I suggest dropping the Valkyries upgrade to 150pts.
In addition, Vendettas are much better than Valkyries.
I suggest paying a points cost like with the Punisher cannons for Vultures to upgrade them.

Vultures, I assume the upgrade to punisher cannons is for all 4 vehicles? (It's not explicit)

Same question for the Sentinels' Sky Talon upgrades. Also the upgrade is 80pts in a lsit that mostly works on 25pt divisions, meaning that effectively they cost 100pts. Suggest changing that to 75pts.

Likewise, I suggest dropping Tauros' Sky Talon upgrade to 150pts (Or, actually, 125pts, as they're not as good as standard Valkyries).

Why do the Tauros and Venator, as scout vehicles, not have the Scouts special rule?

The Tauros is definitely not as good as the Multilaser Venator. I suggest changing the weapon from the Grenade Launcher (Since your stats don't match what it does in 40k anyway) and use the Heavy Flamer version. That gives it a different role of pure AP that ignores cover. Gve it FF4+ too.

Also on the Venator, I suggest dropping the FF of the Lascannon Venator to 6+. (AT weapons rarely grant a good FF rating, and otherwise it's better than the Multilaser Venator).

Storm Troopers : As with core companies, Vendettas are better than Valkyries.

Suggest changing the weapon on the Mortar Squad from one shot to two shots, otherwise it's nowhere near as good as the Support Squad with the missile launchers. Even with 2 shots it's not as good, as it lacks on range, firefight, and the ability to shoot AT. So maybe the upgrade could be 3 units for 50pts.
Currently it's worth about half what the missile launcher support squad is worth.

Upgrade of 4 infantry units for 100pts looks overpriced. Suggest 75pts.

Is the Drop Sentinel Upgrade nessesary?

Why change the Commissars Special Rule?
Especially in a manner that means you're going to have 6 less support slots in a typical army.
I suggest reverting to the Commissars Special Rule that every single other IG list uses.

I'd probably always take the Lunar, and never take the Emperor.
I suggest dropping the points cost of the Emperor to 200pts.

Since you've gone for the War Engine Marauder Destroyer, I suggest dropping it down to 1 plane per flight, at 175pts (Multi-plane War Engine flights create gamey issues).
Also I suggest dropping to armour 5+ to match with the War Engine Marauder used in the published supplement Epic: Siege.
Also, I suggest also allowing Elysians access to the War Engine Marauder from Epic:Siege, for 150pts.

=============

If you remove Iron Discipline, you may want to steal EpicUK's NotLysian special rule: They can start 0-2 aircraft formations on CAP, instead of 0-2 ground formations on overwatch. It helps them deal with enemy aircraft.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

@E&C: On Teleport: It's quite "realistic". If Elysians are Wh40ks version of Paratroopers then imagine them hopping of one by one in a single thin line from a plane/Valkyrie. After touch-down they have to rally quickly from such a dispersed and vulnerable position else enemy units can easily take them out.
So Teleport with the possibility of accumulating some Blastmarkers represents this very well.

Disembarking as a coherent squad from a landed/hovering Helicotper/Valkyrie sees the squad much quicker combat effective.

P.S: Yes i just had read some history stuff about the invasion of Crete in WW2 and the difficulties the German Paratroopers had to manage

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

As noted, I've made my peace with it, and am now just looking at the rest of the list, which has the issues I've noted.

I am very interested in collecting an Elysian army if those issues can be addressed.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

It's just for others who have a problem with it.
Including me who still wants independend transports

And i garee with all you said in your posting above.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

No worries. I’m more than happy to hear your thoughts, especially now that your all famous and everything.

My 40K Elysian (4500 pts) army and their recent battle report (Apocalypse):

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/inde ... &p=2561062




Understand.




I’d be very interested in hearing about your games. You know how I feel about playtesting. I do know that others have felt the same way (Ginger for instance) and discovered that it played differently than they originally thought. Hopefully we’ll see what your experiences are.




At this point, all I will say is that it will be up for discussion. To date, there has been quite a bit of play test evidence to show that the smaller weaker formations require something to keep them in the fight longer. This rule to date, has not had an unbalancing effect on the overall list.

I am more than willing to discuss evidence to the contrary, but so far, that hasn’t even registered as a top issue for the list.

But do play on and we’ll talk.



Ok, I’d be willing to try that.



Could you elaborate on that? I know that the fact they have weapons that continue to shoot after the one shot of the Valkyrie is better, but given that they are completely geared toward AT seems to indicate that they are less flexible. What sort of cost upgrade would you be thinking is justifiable? 25 pts?



My bad, I’ll work on that language.



Agree.



Because sometimes good intentions are not executed perfectly.  I’ll fix that.



Interesting thought. I selected the TGL because in 40K, taking a flamer weapon on such a fragile platform is pretty much a death sentence. The TGL keeps distance between you and the enemy, whilst providing a weapon that can be used on light armor or infantry.

I don’t presume to have this one nailed down at all, so how would you spec it out with the TGL?

Will think on the flamer, though my intention was to provide a tool for a role vs. provide for every 40K option.

[/quote]Also on the Venator, I suggest dropping the FF of the Lascannon Venator to 6+. (AT weapons rarely grant a good FF rating, and otherwise it's better than the Multilaser Venator). [/quote]

Let me look at that. I thought I only had the ML version in there. I agree with what you are saying regarding the lascannon variant.



I agree the list should be consistent between the two.



Ok. This is another unit that is better spec’d than it was, but still needs work. Interesting idea.



Ok.



Well, “necessary” is a very subjective word. If you are referring to the Sentinel upgrade to the Drop Troop companies, I am attempting to reflect the change to the DTCs per the changes in IA8. The DTCs have more organic assets at the platoon level and this is an attempt to model that. It hasn’t seemed to be OTT at this point.

What do you see as the issue?



Actually, that’s exactly what I’ve been attempting to do for the last two versions. It should be one Commissar for every 500 pts. That’s what the Krieg have. What am I saying (or not saying) that is leading to the confusion.

I am in full agreement with you on Commissars.



Actually, I think the real issue is the “slow” rule. Seems like nobody ever takes the big ships. I’m not against your proposal though.


Ok.



Actually had been thinking about that for awhile and I am not against adding it.

=============



I’ll put the ID issue in the parking lot to be evaluated.

_________________
Remember Taros? We do.

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

When testing Vendetta's for the Vanaheim they went from an alternative Vulture formation, to a free swap to any Valkyrie to the final max 2 swap per company. The amount of AT firepower they kick out is amazing, but I do note they they lose all the other weapons in this list so as ever ymmv.

Superb looking army... I only have 3k or so, as I'm not a fan of Apocaylpse.


Longer range, superb AT, on a low armour formation.
I would happily swap out my 8BP short range barrage one-shots (Which are going to hit their target on 5's on 6's) for 12x AT4+ shots every turn on a platform that has the extra range that lets it pop-up to shoot then pop-down to force the enemy to move to tackle them.


EpicUK put a 0-2 patch over the imbalance on their Notlysian list, which is probably the worst of both worlds as you can't fully dedicate the formation to a role but you also haven't solved the imbalance issue of a free swap.

I'd suggest starting with 150pts for 4x Valkyries, or 200pts for 4x Vendettas.

Think about how much Vultures pay for their 8x AT 2+ one-shots, and how many hits you're going to generate over the course of a game with 12 AT4+ shots per turn.

I'd also suggest giving the option of Valkyrie transports to Upgrade choices.



Probably I'd start with AP4+ as it has the same frag stat as a Missile Launcher, but lobs out two templates a turn instead of just one.
From its stats, IIRC it doesn't have any kind of disrupting effect or special effect on morale beyond that of any other conventional weapon, so disrupt doesn't seem to fit.
You'd end up with some stats that are pretty similar to the twin multi-laser.


Heavy Flamer does give it a definitive role, one that's pretty similar to that of the Ork Skorcha.
With the Heavy Flamer, you'd have:

Tauros with Heavy Flamer - AP & Firefight
Tauros Venator with Multi-lasers - Flexibility of AP or AT
Tauros Venator with Lascannons - Dedicated AT

Right now, the Tauros with the Grenade Launcher is competing for the same "flexibility" role of the multi-laser Venator.



I don't see it as being selected ever really, as you're mixing poor armour AV profiles with the teleporting infantry.

If you want some firefight support you're more likely to take some fire support units, that cost half as much.

Against low SR enemies you're not generally going to want the MW punch so at half the price the fire support units are putting out very similar FF hits plus long range shooting, and against high SR enemies you're likely going to lose the Sentinels before they get to activate.

You'd need to drop the upgrade in cost significantly before I'd consider it worthwhile.


For what it's worth, I've played against the EUK Notlysians (Vanaheim) in two recent tournaments, and I think it's a good rule.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Hey Jim, I posted them on the previous page months ago. I believe the response was the same. Gentle tweaks, yada yada yada.

Here is my take - there are so many new units that it is effectively a brand new list. You haven't taken baby steps, you've taken leaps and bounds. I don't have a problem with that at all, but once again there is a gaping contradiction in how things are being done. We can add a bunch of new untested units to the list, but fixing the other issues needs to be done later because it is too much change? I don't get it. If anything those issues should have been dealt with prior to the addition of the new units - it's all back asswards.

And I'm not bailing on your list. You obviously understand my frustration but your need to keep up with the GW Joneses outweighs other concerns. Fine. So what happens when the next iteration comes out and it doesn't have Drop Sentinels because they aren't selling either. Are those going to get eliminated too? One of my concerns is that an army that I am spending a great deal of time and effort on customizing is going to get screwed because you want to match everything that FW/GW does. It ain't right to the players.



I never said I didn't like the idea. I do feel it is insufficient though and I'm not going to lie and say I like it when IMO the premise of your decision is flawed. I mean, has anyone even remotely complained that the list doesn't match IA3 to a tee? <-- No, that doesn't include you, you stubborn Texan.



As mentioned before, the Tau had too many unit types. The Elysians scratch their bones when it comes to unit types. Different lists. Different strategies to cope with the challenges. I'm going to drop it for now since I think badgering you is just going to cause some heel digging and I don't think that's gonna help. >:(

I disagree with E&C on the Marauder Destroyer issue. The discussion to this prior didn't convince me it needed changing then and not much has changed since other than me playing another game with those beasts and still not seeing the issues brought up. His other points have merit, however.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

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

I skimmed over a lot of these posts so I may have missed this, but how would these do for Tauros/Tauros Venator models? (apologies for unnecessarily huge picture)



Khazari Raiders from Exodus Wars.

_________________
Army projects:
Iyanden Eldar - complete
Hive Fleet Scorpio - complete
Ulthwé Eldar - complete
Nova Guard Titan Legion - complete
Crimson Fists Space Marines - complete

You'd have to do something about the weapons as none of them look right for Tauroses.


DRM buggies are probably slightly closer in look, but again you'd need to do something about the weapons.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Well, until slightly more FW-ey looking buggies came out, I was planning on using some of the DRM, but the Exodus
Wars figs (except for the one with the Christmas tree on it) would work for Venators.

I think the real key in a game is whether your opponent is able to distinguish the separate types. Sometimes we do that
with paint schemes.

Anyway, I think they are both workable solutions.

...and I'm working on updating the list. I'd like to have it out in the next couple of days.

Cheers,

_________________
Remember Taros? We do.

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment