Sorry for the delay guys, but I'll try to reply to all points. I might pass over your post if it echoing from others, but all comments and feedback was welcomed and read.
mordoten wrote:
Assault terminator with +2 EA MW attacks sounds pretty damn good.
I kept the CC 3+ and just added an attack for the lack of Shooting Weapons. Ie 1 MW for Lighting Claws and 1 MW for Thunder Hammers and 1 Normal. Too Powerful? Maybe? Normal Termies get 2x AC shots, 1 MW attack for just PF and 1 Normal Attack.
jimmyzimms wrote:
Also since you're going off the reservation on the stats for the Predator Executioner I'd suggest you rename the unit to Dark Angels Predator Executioner. This is not the standard configuration so probably shouldn't claim to be in the unit entry.
Do we have an existing Predator Executioner in a list?? I just took the turret from Leman Russ Executioner. In hindsight maybe Heavy Bolters instead of side Plasma Cannons, but I do love Plasma Cannons, lol.
jimmyzimms wrote:
Perhaps I missed this in the older thread but what's the thought behind inventing a new pattern of dreadnought vs including the Unforgiven only dreadnought pattern of the Mortis? Irrespective, I'd drop the Hellfire from the list if it stays.
Well the Executioner Dread has been in there for a long time, I believe its a normal codex option. Mortis was dropped because it wasn't anything exciting. Hellfire Dread has been an iconic DA item since 2nd 40k. I want to keep 2 Dread options and I rather see fluffy Plasma and Iconic Hellfire.
jimmyzimms wrote:
I am glad to see the assault terminators. I suggested those stats myself but got shouted down this year;) I hope they pan out in testing. Playing with the to-hit if they prove to be OTT is an option to consider after extensive testing. Digging them as they really fit in a DA themed army!
Right! There was discussion when I first brought them in. It was the same time as Frogbear added Assault Termies to the IF list. I want to portray a stand of Lighting Claws and Thunder Hammers, while Frogbear was going for Thunder Only stand. I was told there was too much micro stating with two Assault Termie stats, so I i went with Frog's and gave in. Since I heard IF dropped Assault Termies I could try them back at the stats I thought were more reflective of them.
SpeakerToMachines wrote:
I still think the Plasma cannon statline is vastly inferior to regular missile launchers; those extra 15cm matter. If you're really set on that line, plasma-equipped units should recieve a discount. On the razorback, however, it is better at the same cost than twin bolters, which is unfortunate - why would anyone pick bolter razorbacks, then?
Do you want help with an Armyforge file?
Speaker, So far people imply its an even swap. Only testing can show this. I rather not try different pricing off the bat. Maybe just gut the HB Razor? Or the Plasma?
I always appericate your help if you want to make an Armyforge file.
Kyrt wrote:
List structure:
Aside from the structure itself, might I suggest a different way to word it? Wouldn't it be simpler to remove the general "core" distinction which grants access to additional line companies, and have everything in the same place:
For each Deathwing detachment you can take 2 Line Company detachments
For each Ravenwing detachment you can take 1 Line Company detachment and 1 Ravenwing Support detachment
For each Ironwing detachment you can take 1 Line Company detachment and 1 Ironwing Support detachment
In hindsight, your thought on wording might be better, but it can wait till the next revision since it doesn't change anything in practice. I'll go more in to depth in list design at the end of this reply.
Dobbsy wrote:
Nephilim.... Could we truly not have just gone with 2x aircraft to begin with...? A bit OTT even with the restriction of tying them to the Ravenwing. These are pretty much the best fighters in the game now. The Heavy Bolter could easily be toned down to a 15cm attack for starters.
Meh, damn plane. I'll go more detail later in reply.
Dobbsy wrote:
Assault Terminators - Re-inventing the wheel? Now any other list with them has to change. Otherwise re-name them. Also, they should actually still be +1EAMW as the basic CC weapon would be MW statted. As written they get 3 CC attacks and should lose their Invulnerable save as they don't have Storm Shields. Why do I feel like Assault Termies should be ditched in all lists and just stick with standard...?
I guess we see how they work out....
Where else are they used? I thought it was only in the IF list and then ditch? I want Assault Termies to match across the SM lists if they exist. I just liked these stats as mentioned before. I read as 2 MW and 1 Normal. I don't think they should have 3 MW hits? Again see previous mention.
Dobbsy wrote:
A few typos/grammaticals etc:
Ravenwing - All Bikes, Attack Bikes, Land Speeders (All Variants) have the Scout (-s) ability. Bikes have Teleport Homers which allows Terminator(+s or units) to re-roll a failed Teleport test if within 15cm.
Unforgiven - The Dark Angel (+s') dark secret is their(')s alone(.) No Imperial Allies can be taken in (a) Dark Angel(+s) Force.
The Devastator stat has only 1x Missile Launcher. If they're standard Devs it should be x2.
Good eye mate!
Doomkitten wrote:
On the rest of the list - I strongly, hugely, enormously dislike the idea that ***wing formations should form the core of every army. They are less than one quarter of the standing force of the Dark Angels (I won't even start with how the "Iron Wing" is an abomination against fluff, and a stupid idea implemented to sell more tanks to Dark Angels players). Core should always be regular marines. Always. I have no problem with increasing availability of ***wing units in a DA force, but would prefer something along the following lines:
I'll go into more detail forthwith, however Jimmy rebuttal well to my same thought pattern.
Steve54 wrote:
Deathwing tactics - a free swap of normal terminators for assault is too good IMO. A pure assault terminator formation is worth less than a pure terminator formation as they are so specialized in CC but a mixed formation of 3 terminators and 1 assault or 2 and 2 is IMO better as it vastly improves the terminators primary use CC but leaves them still able yo shoot and FF
Valid concern but the lists has had the option for sometime and yet to yield an issue. It was revamp to not allow 1/3 formations, you have to use pairs when swapping ie 2 Normal 2 Assault or All the same kind. The Deathwing specialization is mixed combat, hence the interchangeability.
Kyrt wrote:
By the way, it occurred to me when I read your report that the Hunt for the Fallen rule as written only allows formations with Characters to be selected. Farseers and Seer Council are not characters, they are infantry units. So technically there actually aren't all that many choices for some armies - for Eldar only exarchs and autarchs. It also raises another reason why this rule is just weird. For some armies it just doesn't make sense that they could be, or associate with, a Dark Angels Fallen. Tyranids and Necrons, I'm looking at you. I'm sorry to be so negative about this rule without giving it a chance, but it just feels wrong on every level to me.
A very good point I overlooked. I'll reply in detail about the rule since there are lots of comments.
Heavens To Betsy wrote:
I think where you've put at the top "All Standard Space Marine rules apply . . .", it should be more explicit and state which rules apply. Presumably you mean And They Shall Know No Fear and Space Marine Transports.
Talking of the latter, none of the detachments include ". . . plus transport", meaning no Rhinos or Drop Pods can conceivably be taken. You could still take Razorbacks, though, since the upgrade just says "add" rather than "replace".
Meh, I was lazy? 
This is an experimental list. I expect the players to understand the rules and NetEA system well enough to know better. Bad assumaption? Maybe. But in the NetEA list packet it will be written clearly but for a standalone testing document I thought it was fine.
ortron wrote:
Agree with speakers comments, though if that's the case of suggest dumping the iron wing to expand the Ravenwing. If we're going to have new units why not have those that are already part of 40k DA?
Ironwing isn't new, its from 1st/2nd 40k fluff and has be lost a bit. I was paying homage as the Ironwing would really be fielded in Epic size games. The only thing new is one Predator which I've been thinking on awhile. I might consider adding the Plasma LS later but not sure. Besides that, what is there? The Icon LS and variant Fighter?
jimmyzimms wrote:
The purpose of this list is to represent not a generic dark angels deployment but one specifically around the hunt for the fallen which is the *-wing's entire purpose therefore it is logical for then to take center stage here. When they're doing a more general deployment just to knock some heads (no fallen) then they'd use the Codex list.
Well said Jimmy and right in line with my thoughts. The DA around the rest of Imperium operates just like a Codex army for the most part. The rest of the time when were Hunting Fallen Angels we act differently. You can use the Codex list to show DA in general for game play. The Hunt will have larger and more units of both RW and DW, therefore is the focus and mandatory formations taken. Minimal Battle and Reserve Companies asset it Hunt operations for 2 reasons, 1- There too busy operate like a normal chapter somewhere else in front of the rest of the Imperium. 2- Only DW (RW are DW members) know about the fallen and in varying degrees, so yes while hunting they are going to have mainly DW members to do it, not line companies.
Is the creation pattern restrictive? Yes, I want to see Wing formations while Hunting the Fallen, there should NOT be general marines in large numbers. 1 DW formation and HALF a Battle Company seems like a good ratio considering the background of the list.
Hunt for the Fallen Special Rule
Revamp? Sure. First test idea that came. Needs tweaking. I would like to see it tested as is or with minor changes for now. But I believe REPLACING BTS is probably a better idea. Also, Kryt brought of a good point about Characters. Maybe a list of certain units? Or worded where any Infantry formation OR formation with a Character added? I mean Farseers and Commissars in Tanks should be target-able. Crons and Nids are sticky but, maybe a Hive Tyrant has Bio-matter that give details? Crons might have SM reclics? idk
Nephilim Jet Fighter
Test it and prove theory hammer, (thanks Ortron). The Avg Bolter is matching stats with the other flyer with the same weapon to the best of my knowledge. I want to keep that. Heavy Bolters match other plane stats, I have seen 15cm and 30cm, possible change if too powerful. Dark Missiles are Completely changeable but no one talks about them really, that's where I'm willing to make the adjustments the most because there is no precedent. 2 instead of 3 planes? Maybe, but I liked the idea of 3 since they seemed small and easily broken. But maybe 250 for 2? Let's get a few tests in and see.
If I missed anything or anyone please throw a rock at me and I'll reply. Thanks again folk for the feedback.
