Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 71 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Vior'la revisited 1.2

 Post subject: Re: Vior'la revisited 1.01
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 8:33 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 4:24 pm
Posts: 186
Location: Galicia
A bit late to the party, but you provided us with a report. Thanks for the treat.

Borka wrote:

Abetillo wrote:
What i don't like is seeing so many weapons whose stats are very similar to existing ones, but i suppose that you want to go with WH40k load out faithfully.

Do you have any examples? I don't think we need to follow 40k faithfully. I look up the 40k stats and have looked att available backrground to get a feel for how strong the different weapons are. So it's a combination to use as a guide for epic stats. But it's just a guide I think playability in epic always has to come first.

I think i was talking mainly about Riptide's Drone Missile and R'Varna Cannons being almost the same as Twin Missile Pods, and also being another of the reasons for asking to change the R'Varna to AP4+ or AP3+, but there must be other similar ones. By the way, The Missile Pods on the Crisis are missing the Twin part, not that it matters much.


Borka wrote:
Abetillo wrote:
- R'Varna: If you are doubting on the AT4+ why not make it AP4+/AT5+ (or even AP3+ maybe) instead and leave them for Infantry and light/medium vehicle hunting role like in the fluff you quoted and leave the big guys hunting for the Stormsurge and the general purpose to the Riptide?

wiki wrote:
All XV107 R’varna Battlesuits are armed with twin Pulse Submunitions Cannons as standard. Unlike standard Pulse Weapons, these powerful cannons fire clusters of sophisticated micro-submunitions that detonate in close proximity to their target in a storm of separate pulse-discharges, showering a wide area with deadly effect. Larger targets such as bulky infantry, monstrous creatures and vehicles inevitably suffer proportionally greater harm from Pulse Submunitions Cannons, as they can be struck with a wave of near-simultaneous detonations, magnifying the blast and ripping them apart.

They're described as being better at killing vehicles. So I think a higher AT than AP or at least not more AP is easier to justify from a background perspective.

Can't see that from that quote save that it should get Lance to hurt at least as much to armored targets than to the rest, and i was using this quote of yours as reference, not that it matters, as i think it is beter if it has an stronger role, no matter what it has in WH40k.
40k wiki wrote:
The XV107 R’varna Battlesuit’s greatest strength, much like the smaller XV88 Broadside Battlesuit, lies in superior ranged firepower. With a role focused primarily on long-ranged heavy fire support, the XV107 is easily able to bring its fearsome firepower to bear on infantry and vehicles, eliminating all but the most heavily armoured forms of each.
This translates for me in strong fire, specially for infantry and light-medium vehicles, with not MW, TK or Lance. Ok, maybe it says MW and Lance, but that would turn it into too close to a Riptide.


Borka wrote:
Atensions suggestion is basically what I tried to do with the Nexus Missile Array. Both the array and the ordinance driver could be justified to be guided missile attack in epic. Having both do that seems like a bit boring and between the two I find it's the array that fits best. It's also harder to justify another kind of attack for it than the pulse driver.
I belive MW4+ is to strong. The 6+ might be to cautious though, perhaps 5+ is a better starting ground like you suggest.

Ok, but it still feels a bit off for such three big cannons not being more powerful. How about 3xAP3+/AT4+ Lance, so it feels more powerful, has three shots as the miniature, and don't overlap with the MW on the missiles.


kyussinchains wrote:
I've attached the latest revision of the EUK list for reference, it's by no means fixed or finished, it needs quite a bit of testing, but so far I've enjoyed my games using it and think it's heading in the right direction...


Interesting one. If you are interested in opinions and advices, i have the same as the one i gave Borka.

Abetillo wrote:
- In my opinion, you should avoid like hell making the three Heavy Battle suit formation suits cost the same. There will be always one that will be taken more by a large margin NO MATTER how well they are balanced, like it happens in many lists out there, and in this case it is harder as the weapons on the Riptide need to be balanced between them. How about making the base 3 Y'Vahra for 275 points which are the weaker by a margin now as long as they don't have any deep striking capabilities and an option to replace them with 3 R'Varna for +25 points and with 3 Riptides for +50 points? It will be way easier to balance too.

_________________
Sculpting Orks thread
Statistics of games for OGBM list


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vior'la revisited 1.01
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2018 3:12 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 7:30 am
Posts: 1473
Location: Örebro, Sweden
You make some good points. I agree the R'varna should probably be a bit better. I will update them to 4+/5+ in the next version. I tried them in a game that I finished today (report over here). Felt the 5+/5+ was lacking.

Abetillo wrote:
Ok, but it still feels a bit off for such three big cannons not being more powerful. How about 3xAP3+/AT4+ Lance, so it feels more powerful, has three shots as the miniature, and don't overlap with the MW on the missiles.


Yeah I think your right. The driver used to have both ignore cover and pinning in 40k. That could be interpreted as both ignore cover and disrupt in epic.
I think we should be take it easy on the lance. I don't want that to be a defining feature of the list and already two formations have it. MW seems a bit bland as all the three weapons would be quite similar.

Perhaps 3 attacks with 3+/4+ IC,D,IF. This way you have 3 quite different choices that all have their tactical role to play.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vior'la revisited 1.01
PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2018 9:41 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 4:24 pm
Posts: 186
Location: Galicia
Please, no. IC and Disrupt are powerful enough on their own, arguably any of them better than Lance but that's another topic, but together are too much. Just choose on:, IC better in my opinion for this than Disrupt with 3xAP4+/AT4+, 3xAP2+/AT3+ without Lance if you don't want it, or just leave it like you have it now with 5 normal shots and look at it later after some games if needed.

_________________
Sculpting Orks thread
Statistics of games for OGBM list


Last edited by Abetillo on Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vior'la revisited 1.01
PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2018 12:14 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid

Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:35 am
Posts: 3215
Location: Norrköping, Sweden.
I agree with Abetillo on this.

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/

"You have a right to be offended" - Steve Hughes
"Your feelings are hurting my thoughts" - Aron Flam


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vior'la revisited 1.01
PostPosted: Wed May 02, 2018 2:40 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 7:30 am
Posts: 1473
Location: Örebro, Sweden
Played another game using the same list as last time. I put it in the batrep thread here.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vior'la revisited 1.01
PostPosted: Mon May 07, 2018 8:08 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 3:15 am
Posts: 309
Were you intending to we should test XV109 Y’vahra Battlesuits at 275 points for the three.
With an additional +25 points for each battle suit upgraded to a R’varna or Riptide.
But to still charge a full 100 points for an additional heavy battlesuit added to the formation,
no matter version.

Have been testing the Manta with the weapons load out as on your list, but also with
Coordinated Fire (due to the command bridge) for 575 points. The split Rail Cannon stat
gives the Manta a much more distinct long range fire roll. Previously the mix of different
ranges meant that you paid for capability you could never really use. A definite improvement.
Is testing at 575 points useful for you?

The reduction in price has made my tactic of having a really big ground based Fire Warrior
formation as the BTS, to overcome the rather vulnerable nature of the Manta if it is a BTS.
Vulnerable due to very hard to hide behind cover, never able to claim a -1 to hit if in cover
and if the enemy has the tools the inevitable critical hit (loss of shield) greatly accelerates
the process.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vior'la revisited 1.01
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 12:51 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 7:30 am
Posts: 1473
Location: Örebro, Sweden
Andrew_NZ wrote:
Were you intending to we should test XV109 Y’vahra Battlesuits at 275 points for the three.
With an additional +25 points for each battle suit upgraded to a R’varna or Riptide.
But to still charge a full 100 points for an additional heavy battlesuit added to the formation,
no matter version.

The upgrade should be 75 points for an Y'vahra and +100 for the rest. I have updated the OP with a new version 1.2.
Andrew_NZ wrote:
Have been testing the Manta with the weapons load out as on your list, but also with
Coordinated Fire (due to the command bridge) for 575 points. The split Rail Cannon stat
gives the Manta a much more distinct long range fire roll. Previously the mix of different
ranges meant that you paid for capability you could never really use. A definite improvement.
Is testing at 575 points useful for you?

I think the extra firepower is big improvement as it becomes really powerful against warengines. I have therefore kept it at 600 points in the update, but feel free to keep testing it at 575 if you like. I'm undecided on the price.

Andrew_NZ wrote:
The reduction in price has made my tactic of having a really big ground based Fire Warrior
formation as the BTS, to overcome the rather vulnerable nature of the Manta if it is a BTS.
Vulnerable due to very hard to hide behind cover, never able to claim a -1 to hit if in cover
and if the enemy has the tools the inevitable critical hit (loss of shield) greatly accelerates
the process.


Could you give an example of such a formation? Don't you suffer from lack of activations then?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vior'la revisited 1.2
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 12:53 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 7:30 am
Posts: 1473
Location: Örebro, Sweden
First post have been updated with version 1.2. It's based on testing so far and from the discussions we've had.


Update 1.2:

  • Restructured the commander upgrade. To show that the crisis upgrade is a commander ugprade.
  • Coordinate fire, Ethreal and Shas'o upgrade for Manta.
  • Lowered price for Y'vahra implemented and also for the upgrade.
  • PFs changed to "Five pathfinder units OR Four pathfinder units and two Devilfish" I don't think two PF units are equal worth to two devilfish.
  • Recon upgrade changed to make tetras easier to use. I think the trade is fair. You gain mobility but loose firepower and resilence.
  • Skyray upgrade added to HH formation
  • Crisis suit formation added back per popular request. Lowered price by 25 pts compared to third phase. I think the upgrade should be + 75 pts in the third phase list.
  • Breachers, increased pulse blasters. The loss of range, disrupt and firepower is not equal to the increase in FF.
  • Slight increase in R'varna AP
  • Supremacy suits weapon changes


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vior'la revisited 1.2
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 4:53 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 2:48 am
Posts: 628
Location: NY, USA
I like a lot of the changes, especially the reinclusion of the crisis suits. Matches the fluff for the Sept. The PF seems fair as well.

There are two points I'd like to raise:
1) the ghostkeel upgrade feels a little pricey at 3 stealth suits AND 25 pts. Maybe 2 stealth or keep the three and drop the 25 pts?
2) I love all of the suits, don't get me wrong. But the list feels a little bloated with them, especially with all three heavy variets coming to full effect at 15cm. I think this could be a good place to exercise "less is more" and chose a select few of the suits to go forward with, and start an alternative list focused on heavy suits. Maybe the Ke'lshan Sept since they developed the R'varna and Y'vahra suits and have a pencant for seige warfare, which benefits the heavier suits.

Keep up the great work!

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

_________________
Eldar and Orks and Nids, Oh my! (Plus Marines , Tau, and Steel Legion.)

The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vior'la revisited 1.01
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 7:31 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 3:15 am
Posts: 309
Borka wrote:
I have updated the OP with a new version 1.2.
Thanks for that. Nice a clear that way.

Borka wrote:
Could you give an example of such a formation? Don't you suffer from lack of activations then.
In my last game I used a standard Tau v.6.8 Fire Warrior Cadre:
6 Fire Warriors, 3 Devilfish [225], 4 Fire Warriors, 2 Devilfish [+125], Ethereal [+50],
2 Pathfinders, Devilfish [+100], Skyray [+100], giving 600 points all up as a BTS.
With your Vior'la list I'd adjust slightly and move to 625 points (or 650 points) to keep
above the Manta cost. With our 4000 point games you can get two Mantas in the 1/3 limit.

EDIT - oops, forgot about the 3 upgrade limit. Notice you have a 4 upgrade limit on the Vior'la,
so it would be legal on that list !!

Yes, you do suffer somewhat from a lack of activations BUT if you treat it like the Titan
heavy list that it actually is then that is not so bad. You get a decent number of other
activations and if you keep them safe-ish then they don't get stripped out too early.

Game report will come out in due course. Will discuss more details then. The Crisis Suit
upgrades (added AT6+ on the Plasma Rifle, and upgrades at two for 75 points) brought
those up to a useful level of power. A couple of 6 unit formations got wiped out during
assaults but it was close and they did some damage at other times. So glad to see you
have included those changes in the new Vior'la 1.2 version.


Last edited by Andrew_NZ on Tue May 08, 2018 8:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vior'la revisited 1.2
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 7:48 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 7:30 am
Posts: 1473
Location: Örebro, Sweden
gunslinger007 wrote:
I like a lot of the changes, especially the reinclusion of the crisis suits. Matches the fluff for the Sept. The PF seems fair as well.


gunslinger007 wrote:
There are two points I'd like to raise:
1) the ghostkeel upgrade feels a little pricey at 3 stealth suits AND 25 pts. Maybe 2 stealth or keep the three and drop the 25 pts? '

Hmm, the way I worded it is says that you can replace up to three so what I meant was +25 points for one replaced suit. That does seem a bit low though, don't really now what I was thinking. The basic price of a stealth suit is something along the lines of 33 points (200/6). That would make the price 58 points. Probably to low for a teleporting 4+ RA MW attacking AV. Replacing two units and + 25 points gets it 90 points seems more reasonable as a starting point. I will amend that. Thoughts on pricing?

gunslinger007 wrote:
2) I love all of the suits, don't get me wrong. But the list feels a little bloated with them, especially with all three heavy variets coming to full effect at 15cm.

All three? The R'varna is fully effective at 45cm?

gunslinger007 wrote:
I think this could be a good place to exercise "less is more" and chose a select few of the suits to go forward with, and start an alternative list focused on heavy suits. Maybe the Ke'lshan Sept since they developed the R'varna and Y'vahra suits and have a pencant for seige warfare, which benefits the heavier suits.

I can however see what you mean by bloated. My thinking is that there's not so many of us that play tau. It's a niche list. Developing two different lists is strategy that will take to long time and maybe not something we'll pull of. I'd rather see one list finished, from which you can choose different strategies that suits your stile/preferred sept.

gunslinger007 wrote:
Keep up the great work!

Thanks!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vior'la revisited 1.01
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 7:51 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 7:30 am
Posts: 1473
Location: Örebro, Sweden
Andrew_NZ wrote:
Borka wrote:
I have updated the OP with a new version 1.2.
Thanks for that. Nice a clear that way.

Borka wrote:
Could you give an example of such a formation? Don't you suffer from lack of activations then.
In my last game I used a standard Tau v.6.8 Fire Warrior Cadre:
6 Fire Warriors, 3 Devilfish [225], 4 Fire Warriors, 2 Devilfish [+125], Ethereal [+50],
2 Pathfinders, Devilfish [+100], Skyray [+100], giving 600 points all up as a BTS.
With your Vior'la list I'd adjust slightly and move to 625 points (or 650 points) to keep
above the Manta cost. With our 4000 point games you can get two Mantas in the 1/3 limit.

Yes, you do suffer somewhat from a lack of activations BUT if you treat it like the Titan
heavy list that it actually is then that is not so bad. You get a decent number of other
activations and if you keep them safe-ish then they don't get stripped out too early.

Game report will come out in due course. Will discuss more details then. The Crisis Suit
upgrades (added AT6+ on the Plasma Rifle, and upgrades at two for 75 points) brought
those up to a useful level of power. A couple of 6 unit formations got wiped out during
assaults but it was close and they did some damage at other times. So glad to see you
have included those changes in the new Vior'la 1.2 version.

Ok cool that makes for a very tuff formation as long as you can protect the etheral. Would be cool to try out if I do 4000pts game. Looking forward to the report!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vior'la revisited 1.01
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 8:30 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 3:15 am
Posts: 309
Borka wrote:
Ok cool that makes for a very tuff formation as long as you can protect the Ethereal. Would be cool to try out if I do 4000pts game. Looking forward to the report!
Forgot the limit of three upgrades only on the Tau Third Phase list, v.6.8. However it would be legal with your Vior'la v.1.2 with four upgrades. Previous post edited to say just this.

Yes it is very tough provided you spread out and HIDE the Ethereal [sometimes in a Devilfish in cover] very well. Lots of Fearless infantry hanging around the Blitz. And well screened as a BTS. And still useful with Guided Missile fire support. Which would also be provided whilst on Overwatch if there is an Air Assault threat. You don't need to wait for a 4000 point game - it also lets you be very aggressive with a Manta at 3000 points, . . .


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vior'la revisited 1.2
PostPosted: Tue May 08, 2018 9:39 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 2:48 am
Posts: 628
Location: NY, USA
- ghostkeel: ahhh, I understand now. That makes much more sense. And pricing at ~90pts seems more accurate. Black legion terminators come to ~70pts, but need to engage in CC for their MW and don't have marker lights, but have the better SR. Two Ghostkeels sustaining with stealth suits are 2+MW in you backfield *shudder*.
- My mistake on the ranges, I goofed following the stat lines across.
- Focusing on one list makes sense (two if we count the city fight Tau, don't want that project forgotten!) Once Vior'la is approved, maybe I'll propose my thoughts on a heavy suits/sieging gunline list when the community can focus more attention to it rather than spreading the efforts. ;-)

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

_________________
Eldar and Orks and Nids, Oh my! (Plus Marines , Tau, and Steel Legion.)

The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Vior'la revisited 1.2
PostPosted: Wed May 09, 2018 11:49 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 3:15 am
Posts: 309
gunslinger007 wrote:
- ghostkeel: ahhh, I understand now. That makes much more sense. And pricing at ~90pts seems more accurate. Black legion terminators come to ~70pts, but need to engage in CC for their MW and don't have marker lights, but have the better SR. Two Ghostkeels sustaining with stealth suits are 2+MW in you backfield *shudder*.

Borka wrote:
Hmm, the way I worded it is says that you can replace up to three so what I meant was +25 points for one replaced suit. That does seem a bit low though, don't really now what I was thinking. The basic price of a stealth suit is something along the lines of 33 points (200/6). That would make the price 58 points. Probably to low for a teleporting 4+ RA MW attacking AV. Replacing two units and + 25 points gets it 90 points seems more reasonable as a starting point. I will amend that. Thoughts on pricing?

If you make it a replace 2 Stealth units for 1 Ghostkeel (+25 points) then it makes the formation options:
3 Ghostkeels [300 points], very easily broken, expensive and NO markerlights
2 Ghostkeels, 2 Stealth Suit units [275 points], small formation, 2 MW shots it is true but still pretty AP focused, fewer rolls of 1 when teleporting.
1 Ghostkeel, 4 Stealth Suits [250 points], makes formation vulnerable to AT shooting as well.

Perhaps make the upgrade replace one stealth suit unit and +50 points if you feel they should be more expensive. I have found making six strong teleport formations work well challenging - too many BMs on the teleport in, and usually try to place them too aggressively. The reduced movement on the Ghostkeels mean you need to place closer for the formation to be effective compared to the Stealth Suits. This +50 point costing would make the upgraded formations significantly more expensive and I'd probably not select them either.

I was enthused about original option!! The proposed EpicUK list had even more potent Ghostkeels on an upgrade swap of 1 Stealth Suit +25 points for each one.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 71 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net