Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 

New squat reporting for duty

 Post subject: New squat reporting for duty
PostPosted: Sat Apr 12, 2025 8:47 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2025 3:00 pm
Posts: 4
As the title says: I went a little crazy on eBay the other day and the result is this decently sized squat army (see attached picture). I also have some extra unpainted plastics, including thud guns and mole mortars, which basically add up to about a 5500 point army all told.

I'd love to get involved with the work to get them tournament approved, so my question is: which version of the army should I run? The armyforge site still uses Grindel Stronghold Squats (1.7), but if the 1.7.2 list is closer to being accepted, I'll happily use that.

We have a fairly active Net:EA group around here (in Denmark) where we also run a biannual tournament (usually three rounds), so I can probably get to six games in about half a year.


Attachments:
20250408_124933.jpg
20250408_124933.jpg [ 1.59 MiB | Viewed 27438 times ]
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: New squat reporting for duty
PostPosted: Tue Apr 15, 2025 2:00 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 11:25 pm
Posts: 9526
Location: Worcester, MA
Hey Croaker. Armyforge should be the latest list, if it's not let me know and I'll see about updating the file.

Glad you're looking to help out, let us know your group's thoughts after you've had a few games.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: New squat reporting for duty
PostPosted: Wed Apr 16, 2025 8:43 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:04 pm
Posts: 5999
Location: UK
always good to see more squats! (… someday i'll even see my own)

_________________
AFK with real life, still checking PMs


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: New squat reporting for duty
PostPosted: Wed Apr 16, 2025 12:50 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 9658
Location: Manalapan, FL
Excellent!! Welcome aboard and new batreps are always welcome

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: New squat reporting for duty
PostPosted: Wed Apr 16, 2025 1:03 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2025 3:00 pm
Posts: 4
Dave wrote:
Hey Croaker. Armyforge should be the latest list, if it's not let me know and I'll see about updating the file.

Glad you're looking to help out, let us know your group's thoughts after you've had a few games.


Happy to be on board. Actually played a game of Net:EA just yesterday, but I do want to at least get the base colors on the war engines before playing, so I fielded my IG instead.

As far as I can see, Armyforge still runs the 1.7 list. The Cyclops and Colossus are 550 points and Guild squadrons are 175.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: New squat reporting for duty
PostPosted: Sat Apr 19, 2025 12:52 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 11148
Location: Canton, CT, USA
Naturally, I heartily endorse another Squat player

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: New squat reporting for duty
PostPosted: Mon Apr 21, 2025 4:50 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:21 pm
Posts: 1272
Location: UK/Suffolk
Love to see them all laid out on a table :)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: First BATREP
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2025 12:25 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2025 3:00 pm
Posts: 4
I finally got enough of my Squats painted that I wasn’t too embarrassed to field them, so I’ve now played my first game.

A more detailed battle report (with pictures!) can be found through the link below, but here’s the TL;DR:

Game type:
3000 point tournament game

Armies:

Grindel Stronghold Squats (1.7.2), 2995 POINTS
==================================================

WARRIOR [345]
10 Warriors, Rhinos, Warlord, Grand Warlord

BERSERKER [215]
7 Berserkers, Hearthguard, Rhinos

BERSERKER [175]
5 Berserkers, Hearthguard, Tunnelers

THUNDERER [420]
8 Thunderers, 3 Rapier

ARTILLERY BATTERY [150]
5 Mole Mortar

GYROCOPTER WING [200]
3 Iron Eagle

GUILD ROBOT SQUADRON [225]
5 Colossus Class Robot

THUNDERFIRE BATTERY [150]
2 Thunderfire

GUILD SQUADRON (M) [315]
7 Guild Bikers, 2 Guildmaster, 4 Guild Trike

AIR ATTACK CORPS [250]
Overlord

LAND TRAIN [550]
Land Train, Berserker Battlecar, Dragon Battlecar, Mortar Battlecar, Bomb Battlecar

Biel-Tan Craftworld (NetEA Tournament Pack (2023-01-03)) - 2995 POINTS
==================================================

AVATAR [0]

ASPECT WARRIOR WARHOST [550]
Dire Avenger, 2 Exarch, 4 Wave Serpent, Striking Scorpion, 4 Howling Banshee, 2 Dark Reaper

ASPECT WARRIOR WARHOST [400]
4 Dire Avenger, Exarch, Autarch, 2 Striking Scorpion, 2 Fire Dragon

GUARDIAN WARHOST [300]
Farseer, 7 Guardians, 3 Wraithguards

RANGER TROUPE [125]
5 Ranger

WINDRIDER TROUPE [200]
6 Jetbikes

SWORDS OF VAUL TROUPE [295]
Falcon, Fire Storm, 3 Fire Prism

NIGHT SPINNER TROUPE [175]
3 Night Spinners

PHANTOM TITAN [750]

Result:
2-1 win for the elder on turn 4 (I.E. a close fight)

Link to BATREP: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1r6SwfA ... sp=sharing

Thoughts on the 1.7.2. list:

The game was against one of my regular opponents. We are generally fairly evenly matched, though probably 60-40 in his favor, so getting a very narrow loss on my first game with the list feels reasonable.

We deliberately both chose fairly rounded armies to get as “natural” an experience as possible.

In terms of usability, the squats are certainly much easier to handle than Orks and probably in line with Imperial Guard.

Overall, it feels like a good, solid, list with some strong points and a number of weaknesses for the opponent to exploit.

Some words about the various units I fielded (and some I deliberately didn’t use):

Warrior Brotherhood: They warriors themselves did decently for their price and the grand warlord is a total (if very expensive) beast in combat. I wouldn’t change much.

However, pricing Hearthguard at 70 points seems excessive. I suppose the closest comparison are ork Nobs, who have worse special rules but better stats and are priced at 35 points a piece. Or maybe an IG Storm Trooper with commissar at 25 points (depending on how you see it), who would generally be better in almost every way.

I would at least suggest giving Hearthguard an EA (+1) assault weapon, if not an outright MW assault.

The fact that Hearthguard are so expensive also means that the discount from taking medium and large formations generally gets eaten up.

For example: Instead of a medium Warrior Brotherhood (18 warriors and two hearthguard), I could get a small brotherhood, plus three Rapiers and seven warriors (so, one hearthguard, 16 warriors and three Rapiers) with 10 points to spare. That’s a deal I’d take almost any day. Add in Rhinos, and you even get more total units with the second option (31 to 30).

Berserker Brotherhood: My opponent targeted these really heavily, so they didn’t get to see much actual action. On the flip side, they did occupy the Phantom Titan for half the game, so I suppose they did well enough.
With these I can at least see the case for a single hearthguard, as it will let you place a blast marker at range. Once again, I’m not sure about the case for upgrading to medium or large units, mostly because you have to pay the premium for another hearthguard.

Mole Mortars:
They did well, though I really should paint up another one to get the extra blast marker. Seems fine.

Gyrocopters (Iron Eagles): Very dangerous - I would probably almost always include some. Having just three in a formation means that you break too easily though, so I would generally field at least four. They seem to be well priced.

I’m going to try out the Steel Hawk variant at some point, as it seems fairly interesting, but I really cannot see the War Hawk as anything but a straight downgrade. Even against a 4+ reinforced AV (probably the best case use), it only changes from 0,2 to 0,25 hits per attack, and in any other situation, it’s purely worse than an Iron Eagle.

Guild Squadron: I really like these, and in the future I expect that my opponent will be very careful around them, after they completely mauled his aspect warriors (with supporting Vampire Raiders, Avatar and Guardians!). Trying to find the right mix of bikes and trikes is an interesting puzzle.

Guild Masters seem reasonable at 50 points, though they really should have lascannons if you want to be true to the old rules. Still, I think they work well as is.

Thunderfire Battery: Given the Squats lack of flyers and AA, these seem almost mandatory. I didn’t have a third one painted, but at only 25 points extra, the first two almost seem like a tax to get the third. I don’t mention them in the battle report, as they didn’t do much, apart from placing some blast markers on the Guardians, but their very presence sort of closed off the center of the board for the Vampire Raider, so I have no complaints.

Guild Robots: I brought a unit of these, but mostly to fill out points. At 225 points for five, I really struggle to see a good argument for these. I would basically rather bring any of the other things you can get for the same price.

The Colossus Class, with its Multi-melta, might have some small use against Space marines, but for the same price you could get a Guild Squad with a Guild Master and seven Trikes sporting the same weapon but with more than twice the movement to actually get in range for a shooting attack or firefight.

I really think these need some sort of upgrade to be even remotely useful.

Thunderers: I positioned these badly, so I didn’t get to see them at their full potential. I’ll try them another time, but they seem fine as is.

Land train: Great, iconic, unit. It’s slow and expensive, but very dangerous. I rather suspect that a single Bomb + Skyhammer battle car might be the best way to use one of these.

I will also try out a Colossus at some point, but if you don’t bring your tiny metal toy train, why are you even playing Squats in the first place?

I feel like I need to point out that a Land Train with a Fire shield and two berserker battle cars is the same price as a Leviathan. Given that the ability to transport lots of units in a vehicle that itself only moves 15 cm is fairly marginal (the only real advantage the Leviathan would have in this matchup), I don’t see why anyone would ever choose the Leviathan. This is not to say that the Land Train is too cheap (I think it’s well priced for what it does), but rather to say that the Leviathan lacks a clear reason for existing and/or is too expensive.

I really think that the Leviathan needs to become a transport option for a Warrior Brotherhood (or something similar), if you ever want to see them on the table. Maybe bring back the classic Ironbreaker Formation.

I also think that the Land Train needs a small FAQ regarding firing arcs. We played it so that the arch was measured from the battle car that held each weapon, but this makes it quite slow to play and leaves lots of room for interpretation.

Also, also, the “Imperial Void Shields” rule box should be included on the army list - just to avoid confusion.

Overlord: I used mine poorly, so it didn’t do too much in the game, but it seems fine as it is.

It would be somewhat simpler to use in the game if it was changed to have four Battle cannons with all-round firing arcs (as a compromise between worst and best positioning right now), plus the two FxF twin autocannons, but that’s just a suggestion.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: New squat reporting for duty
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2025 10:38 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 11148
Location: Canton, CT, USA
Except for Warriors, I tend to field medium formations to make them more survivable, even if it means sacrificing activations. Also, I prefer thudd guns over mole mortars, but to each his own.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: New squat reporting for duty
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2025 12:23 am 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 11:25 pm
Posts: 9526
Location: Worcester, MA
Thanks for the batrep and your thoughts, croaker.

I'd put the Hearthguard at 35-50 points with their current stats. You're mostly paying for Inspiring and Leader. EA has an "activation tax" built into its lists, which may be throwing your mental math off and making it look like they cost 70. It's something like 25-50 points per activation. Having 12 units spread across 4 formations should be more expensive than having them spread across 3 formations, as 4 activations can stall and have free reign of the battlefield when playing against 3 formations.

Have a look at the playtest changes: https://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd ... 98#p646798

They give the Warhawk a bit of a bump.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: New squat reporting for duty
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2025 8:38 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2025 3:00 pm
Posts: 4
Dave wrote:
Thanks for the batrep and your thoughts, croaker.

I'd put the Hearthguard at 35-50 points with their current stats. You're mostly paying for Inspiring and Leader. EA has an "activation tax" built into its lists, which may be throwing your mental math off and making it look like they cost 70. It's something like 25-50 points per activation. Having 12 units spread across 4 formations should be more expensive than having them spread across 3 formations, as 4 activations can stall and have free reign of the battlefield when playing against 3 formations.

Have a look at the playtest changes: https://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd ... 98#p646798

They give the Warhawk a bit of a bump.

You are probably right about me missing the "activation tax". If we put that at 25 points (which would seem correct in relation to the discount for larger formations), that would put Hearthguard at 45/50 points for warriors/berserkers, which is a bit on the expensive side, if you ask me, but not too excessive.

I suppose that the thing I'm really disagreeing with, then, is the low discount you get for medium and large formations (only 25/50 points as opposed to the ork's 50/100 for most things).

As long as you retain the option to buy unlimited numbers of the basic troop type for each brotherhood, going all-in for a medium or large formation doesn't seem all that appealing to me at the moment. I'm not arguing for removing the option to buy troopers piecemeal BTW - that would be a horrible idea IMO.

About the playtest changes: I would tend to agree with all of those. How would it affect the approval process, if I used them in my games?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 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