| Brood Brother |
 |
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
|
So the army has been out for a while, I've got more metal siege infantry than is healthy and have played stacks and stacks of games.
In brief here are my recommendations.
Incorporate discussed FAQ (can dig out if you want to see it).
Infantry companies +50 points
SC company +25 points
Hellhounds -25 points
Snipers are 1-2 units per upgrade, 25 points each.
Roughriders +25 points
Artillary Battery +25 points for emplacements.
Flak -25 points
Artillary company -25 points
Heavy Tanks -25 points
Sappers get Small Arms ignore cover, Walker
Marauders get fixed by rules review please
So - what are my findings?
The army performs as intended. The troops are poor, it manoeuvres very badly, but it can take a lot of damage sitting in its lovely fortifications. The limit on support means that you will always be an infantry based force.
That?s the good.
The bad is...
Its overpowered. I have lost 2 games total with it when not playtesting against powergamed armies that aren't published yet (like Chaos etc) - note I do draw occasionally  .
Its nigh impossible to use at 5000 points on a 8x4 table, it takes an eternity to set up and fills the table to groaning point.
There?s too many activations.
Some units are a bit too poor, while others are a bit too good (for their points).
First, my all conquering 3000 point horde (or rather the army I used last, it changes a lot as I try out different combo's). (Using experimental Barrage rules upping the rt's at firepower, different force otherwise.)
150 points SiegeMaster HQ
100 points Griffons
500 points 4 Infantry companies
450 points Artillery Company
150 points Artillery battery
250 points 2 AA Formations
300 points Heavy Tank Formation
300 points 2 Light Tank Formations
250 points Sappers
200 points Deathstrikes
200 points 2 Fortifications
150 points Thunderbolts
100+ units, 15! Activations
Note the force could be better by dropping certain units for others, getting more fortifications etc but even I like units that aren't that optimal and have a soft spot for thunderbolts (but I'm always tempted by more artillary:)
Its wins by taking ages to die, laying a million blast markers (and sometimes actually killing stuff) and by having brilliant saves when in cover.
It loses by being out assaulted, air assaulted and having to move. I would have a tough time against an all armoured foe, but that hasn't come up yet.
I've messed around with transports and artillery companies but they just don't cut the mustard when everyone else isn?t moving. Likewise others use a lot more support but I find the horde to be slightly more effective.
Overall I think that the unit and activation count should go down and have a few tweaks to achieve that. Note the small formations have staying power due to all the fortifications.
My aim is to bring down the number of units and activations (and therefore staying power, set up time etc) without impacting the armies offensive capabilities and manoeuvring.
So here is a formation by formation breakdown of the army.
Infantry company.
The most numerous part of the army, pretty poor assault wise but normally in cover or reinforced for attacking roles.
It breaks faster than Guard in the open due to smaller unit size but the fortifications mean it can have great stationary staying power.
In my opinion the Infantry Company is the key problem for the army. Its the bulk of the units, its compulsory for all the nifty support gear and its damn cheap.
The price distorts the cost of other options. For instance support guns for 75 points are a good buy - but for less than the cost of 6 guns I get 10 more infantry and 2 more support slots.
Overall I think the size shouldn't be touched, they sit in cover most often so upping their size would make them disproportionately hard. Their equipment is appropriately bad (heavy stubbers? Ye Gods!) and they aren't that effective.
They are however the gateway unit for other formations, so if their cost goes up the number of activations and units in the army falls.
Recommendation - Increase the cost of the infantry company to 175 points.
SC company.
Same as above really. The SC in a siege army has a strange problem - it is a damn big bullseye. It has a unique rule that means it is a BTS in addition to the highest costing formation. Gives you two choices - hide or tool up to be the only BTS and assualt. I shift between the two options depending on how I feel. However he should still cost at least as much as the grunts so a points increase for him as well.
Recommendation - Increase the cost of the SC infantry company to 175 points.
Thudd and Rapiers.
Personally I reckon the Thudd Gun has a slight edge now, but other siege players reckon differently. I would too if I saw more Leman Russ. At 75 points they are slightly unatractive as compared to the infantry but with the increase in price the balance shifts ever so slightly. So leave well alone.
Infantry platoon.
No change to cost, by being more attractive to reinforce companies rather than buy new ones (due to company cost increasing) the activation count comes down.
Hellhounds and Griffons
Suffer by being AT targets attached to infantry formations so not that popular. Have toyed with idea of dropping cost by 25 points, at least for the Hellhounds.
Of course I would really like to simply change them into 'siege' vehicles. I.e. slow 'em down, change the secondary weapon fits to stubbers, that sort of thing. Of course this is where th elack of new models come in but to give you an idea of what I'd want here is my version of the Hellhound (based on the 2nd ed model).
Speed 20cm, Save 4+, CC 6+, FF 4+, Inferno cannon 30cm AP3+ Ignore Cover & Small Arms Ignore Cover.
100 points for 3.
As I can't make this happen, but still want to see less activations -25 points for the hellhound and no change to the griffon (with Hellhound 'saves' in the front it becomes more survivable). Note this makes 'em different to the guard, but there thet accompany mechanised formations normally so the AT issue isn't.
Recommendation, Hellhound upgrade costs 125 points.
Snipers.
I have loads, as does anyone buying epic guardsman. They just aren't taken much but the price when they are taken can be worth it (die die die characters and welcome to my scout zone of control). But I often have a spare 25 points - so to get this unit out more..
Recommendation - Sniper Upgrade becomes 1-2 snipers for 25 points each.
Artillery company
Well, its the BTS ready to go. Horribly vulnerable both choices of transport and emplacement have problems. The transport option means you are waiting to die generally, but can run, the emplacements that you get wiped out the first assualt you fight. The cost has proven to be slightly high as well. Normally I just go for 3 batteries, same cost, same firewpower, more activations and BM. Now I reckon the battery cost is slightly alright, so how to encourage the use of these over them? 50 points doesn't mean you will automatically take it over other options howeer is does mean it is less of an achilies heel and more of a strength. Now maybe all that is needed is changes to other formations however I'd like to see it tried.
Recommendation - Artillery company price drops to 425 points.
Artillery batteries
Ah yes, the best formation in my view. Cheap, expendable, high firepower and when entrenched difficult to deal with. 3 have more firepower than the company (under the experimental rules everyone seems to like). Okay so not as good as basilisks but 100 points cheaper. The cost for firepower and protection is fine here - what throws things off is the option to entrench. Unlike the company losing one to an assault isn?t that bad and the benefits to defence are great. Little movement is wanted to with the range.
I reckon making these chaps pay to entrench further increases the attractiveness of the company and also has a bit of a fluff reason - companies are in place (maybe) and firing, these batteries are brought up as replacements or as additional support as it is needed.
Recommendation - Make the battery come with transports as standard and make them have to pay 25 points extra to be entrenched instead.
Roughriders
I reckon these chaps are a little too hot in attacks. Others may disagree and I know this has been discussed in general for Guard. I guess also I like to see the assault troops in the list be a bit pricey. The are disadvantaged by not being able to use trenches and the like. Maybe they shouldn?t be pricier, what do you all reckon?
Recommendation ? RoughRider formations cost 175 points.
Light Tanks
Tractors with attitude. I love ?em. Then they die. Work best when not being shot at, for a strong formation surprisingly fragile. I see no problem and have received no complaints about them.
Heavy tanks
I like the model. I have lots. Rarely will you see a formation in your army get as pounded as these chaps. 6 strong makes ?em a bit brittle, RA or no. Rarely survive a battle as they provide several things the army lacks ? AT fire, hardness and a good target for MW/TK/AT shots. The fact the buggers have a 60cm gun don?t help. They are slightly underperforming for cost and oft I am tempted to switch them out, sticking with them for the big tank factor. Perhaps a reduction in cost will make them fit in a bit better?
Recommendation ? Heavy Tank formation cost 275 points
AA battery
Okay, these guys ain?t cutting it. In testing they were 75 points for 3 with a 4+ entrenched save. They were also available as a company add on. They got made into separate batteries (quite rightly), the entrenched save went to 5+ and the points to 125. I think all three was a bit steep for what is a pretty poor flak piece (normally immobile, LV, AA 5+, 60cm range). The range is good but the rest a bit poor. The army is already very vulnerable to air attack, having flak that can be destroyed and broken very easily is a bit much. With no attached flak the army relies on these 3 gun formations and I think it is a bit too precarious. (Now 6 gun formations would be great! .)
Recommendation ? Flak battery costs 100 points.
Super Heavies
Well, it?s a shame they aren?t more siege like. Can see why they are in there and they seem to work, not my favourite formations though.
DeathStrikes
Compulsory and the only source of ranged TK/MW fire apart from the single shadowswords. Change if rules review changes them for Guard.
Sappers
My personal favourite unit to play with. I mean Sappers?
Many siege players reckon they are overpriced. Maybe they are, however I simply can?t get enough of them so can?t take an objective view. Often my attack is built around them simply because I like ?em so much. Sadly this means they often die. Two things spoil my enjoyment. 1 ? If I flame the target point blank it gets no cover, but if I firefight it gets a cover save? Come on! And I have lost count of the number of sapper I lose to my own barbed wire. Normal troops, fair enough ? but my engineers? Surely they can deal with wire?
Recommendations ? Sapper Units get Small Arms Ignore Cover and Walker abilities.
Fortifications
They do what they say on the tin. Since there is a limit to how many of these you want and it stays the same for the GT scenario, maybe going up a bit at 4-5000 points they are fine. 100 points allows 2 infantry companies to get cover, as long as you want to bunch up to suffer artillery strikes and intermingled assaults. Essentially what make the army the army I reckon.
In case you were wondering it changes the sample army above by 125 points (if you agree with the rt company reduction) - however it also weakens the rt battery slightly and would change the griffons into something else. But I think I would revise the list somewhat given the above.
So what do you think? What are your experiences fighting and fighting with Siege armies?
_________________ If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913 "Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography." General Plumer, 191x
|
|
)