At this rate, we will have the next revision up by tomorrow
Ok, I will ask questions and tackle each one separately.
===========
Removal of Predators and Changing the Land Raider are an option - I am not too happy about it but I am not going to stand in the way of progress. Playtests will show whether they need them or not anyways.
============
Whirlwinds:
So would people be ok with the formation of 4 with the upgrade to purchase 2 more to make it 6? The reason I ask this, is because at 4, they are up to 300 points. If we make the minimum 6, then they are probably up around the 425-450 price mark as standard. With the hope of keeping the army activation competitive, I am thinking that the formation of 6 as standard goes against this design. So again, thoughts on how they should be purchased?
============
Castellans: I knew my last post regarding upgrades would not come across correctly.
What I was proposing that rather than have different formations doing the same thing, have it exist in a format similar to this (as an example only):
Whirlwinds - 4 whirlwinds - 300 points, Upgrade the formation to Castellans +75 points
So rather than have the two formations, keep the two units, however pay the upgrade cost to gain the Ignore cover trait. Does this work for people?
============
Static Defences - everything listed by E&C here I agree with. No issues there
- Minefield and setting the dimensions - I was actually thinking about that. I could not find it in any list other than some weird rule about hidden counters - something I would rather avoid. So yes, something like the 50cm and 2cm wide is fine.
============
Changing tarrantulas to Immobile - damn, there goes my roads idea! *kidding*. Yep, once again, easily done.
============
Terminators - people seem to forget that Terminators can themselves be charged. Seeing that charge can be made with various units which would allow a FF engage range of 30cm - 50cm, I daresay the Titanhammer terminators, in my battles at least, will be a rarity I think. Seeing they are normally outnumbered, and most likely have a BM on them, they are already -4 on the combat resolution. At least when standard terminators are clipped, they get a minimum of 1-2 FF shots off at 3+ which is almost a guaranteed hit, and possibly a wound. That +1 could, and usually is, the difference between losing and winning a combat. Titanhammer terminators do not have this defence (regardless of their armour). If I saw them on a table, I would at least make sure I had a Rhino charge for a clipping assault as then I know that I have that guaranteed +4 and am not going to take a wound. With standard terminators, there would be more of a thought process and calculation.
I do not really wish to remove the rule. At present from what I recall, it seems pretty even for and against its inclusion. Then again I could take it out, let playtests go for a year and see if the trend away from the Titanhammer termies is evident. I guess that will be the answer in the end...
Final pathetic plea...Also remember that this army does not have the same luxury to dump its transports. Why would they when they pay so much for them?
At present they also pay the premium for any spaceship or drop pod potential (due to what is available to them)
They just seem to be losing out in so many areas IMO that such a rule would be a balance for them.
============
Siege Titans and Siege Dreads : I will look at these when I am not so tired - been a long day, need to sleep.