Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 195 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13  Next

Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.5 DRAFT

 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.5 DRAFT
PostPosted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 3:42 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6397
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
Regarding the thunderfires, I would love to know with what would like me to tow them! Rhinos seem out. Leviathans? I'm at a loss. On the 4+ CC, I see the argument for and against the change. I'm on the fence.

_________________
Current Fan-made Epic Supplements
[url=http://www.tacticalwargames.net/resources/raiders2.zip]Epic: Raiders 2.0

Epic: Siege
Making your own Epic Supplement
Syncing Forward


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.5 DRAFT
PostPosted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 9:27 am 
Hybrid
Hybrid

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:32 pm
Posts: 4845
Location: North Yorkshire
Engage Old Man mode,

Rhinos used to be able to tow Rapiers and Thudd guns in the very early days of Rogue Trader.

Old man mode off

Although I prefer emplacements for the Thunderfires

_________________
_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk - home of the UK Epic tournament scene
NetEA NetERC Xenos Lists Chair
NetEA Ork + Feral Ork + Speed Freak Champion


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.5 DRAFT
PostPosted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 1:06 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:59 pm
Posts: 196
Location: Edinburgh
Hey guys,
I am relatively new to squats, but is there any reason why the exo armour-troops dropped out of the list?

_________________
Image


My Specialist Games blog: http://gemana.wordpress.com/
My youtube channel: http://www.youtube.com/channel/UClbU-8oQsI7kdtt-eoF6VTQ


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.5 DRAFT
PostPosted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:04 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 3:17 pm
Posts: 36
good evenig gentllemen !

Like most of you i like the changes. Transferring overlords into the support formation section and the levitian into the transport section is fine for me.

Land train; we hardly ever use roads in our games . Beside that i like the idea of the train getting faster the further it moves :D
Still vote for land train car with aa option .

Thunderfire; range of 60 and price back to 100 is fine for me. Question; may i take a third gun and warriors (but 4 for 100 points is quiet pricey according to the upgrade 5 warriors and transport for 100) to bolster the unit ?
Gunemplacements for immobile AA is something to think about.

cc4 for the war engines i like that. According to their size there is no need to jump. Rolling straight forward they plllpfff >:D everyone and everything that is in their way.

So , draft 1.5 you are welcome ;)

kind regards

Stefan


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.5 DRAFT
PostPosted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:29 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:51 am
Posts: 278
"Rhinos used to be able to tow Rapiers and Thudd guns in the very early days of Rogue Trader."

This is what I was thinking. But emplacements sounds fine as well. The drop from 125 to 100pts is better ;)

The fact that WE's can always use FF against larger assault formations(Where they can't all reach BtB) makes their CC value less important -Its only really CC units like warbikes/Striking scorpions i.e CC troops who are lightly armed and have small numbers who should be majorly affected by whether its 4+ or not. I'd expect dedicated CC WE or Terminators to beat Overlords/Colossus regardless.

Would 5+ CC be a good compromise?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.5 DRAFT
PostPosted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 10:32 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6397
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
I had them at 5+ and had folks grumbling, so I don't think it is unreasonable at all, Mark. :)

Gun emplacements = new unit

Stat suggestions?

OR... They could be guarded by Tarantulas...

_________________
Current Fan-made Epic Supplements
[url=http://www.tacticalwargames.net/resources/raiders2.zip]Epic: Raiders 2.0

Epic: Siege
Making your own Epic Supplement
Syncing Forward


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.5 DRAFT
PostPosted: Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:35 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:51 am
Posts: 278
Attached tarantulas, now that is a good idea...

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.5 DRAFT
PostPosted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 4:49 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6397
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
anyone else?

_________________
Current Fan-made Epic Supplements
[url=http://www.tacticalwargames.net/resources/raiders2.zip]Epic: Raiders 2.0

Epic: Siege
Making your own Epic Supplement
Syncing Forward


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.5 DRAFT
PostPosted: Wed Jan 01, 2014 6:54 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 7:30 am
Posts: 1486
Location: Örebro, Sweden
Moscovian wrote:
anyone else?


I'm afraid I haven't played thurgrim for over a year, but I'll give my thoughts.

nafets wrote:
(but 4 for 100 points is quiet pricey according to the upgrade 5 warriors and transport for 100)

I like the warrior upgrade idea, but agree with nafets 100 pts seems pricey. 75 pts would feel more fair.


Concerning 4+ CC stat of Warengines, I think a CC stat of 4+ is fine. It can be argued from the old rules/fluff. The warengines were bristling with defensive bolters (the colossus had 16 15cm bolters attacks, the leviathan 12). These point defense bolters could be used to justify the higher CC. I know they're already represented on the profile giving extra FF attacks, but still think anyone getting close would get a lot of point defense fire which could be represented by a higher CC stat.


What's the point of the Siege mortar car? I can't see any reason to ever take it over the bomb car.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.5 DRAFT
PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 3:19 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 3:17 pm
Posts: 36
Hello !

What about handeling the Thunderfire like the siege masters AA. Two options, transport or emplacement ..just a thought ;)
I like the idea to support the thunderfire with tarantulas (both of them tend to stay stationary). This would be a possibility to bring the tarantulas (beeing a stationary unit as well) into the game .

Here we go ;D

The cyclops one shot antitank 2+ indirect fire; I Would love to see them converted into something like At2+ slow firing (loosing the indirect fire ability) because of their size....(or the two options to choose
1) slow firing At2+
2) 6x AT2+ indirect fire, one shot

One more thing is that if you have a look twoards the war engines with transport capacities , required space for robots, tarantulas etc is mentioned.
According to the rules just warriors and berserker formations are allowed to chose transport?

Regards Stefan


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.5 DRAFT
PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 4:33 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 7:29 pm
Posts: 181
I honestly don't like seeing the WE with CC 5+. They are already quite hard as they are. The defense bolters are applied to FF and not CC usually i believe.
The thunderfires lower price seems to compensate for their vulnerability. They don't have to be harder. Just use more of them and protect them with other formations.
The we as transports and overlord in support are very nnice changes. Still have to try them.


I had the chance of playing a tournament here in Portugal along with Rastamann and used the Squats.
The list (1.4) was:
- Warrior brotherhood with Warlord (supreme commander) and Rhinos
- Warrior brotherhood
- Thudd Guns
- 2 mixed Iron Hawk/Eagle formations (one formation with 2 of each, another with 3 Eagles)
- Guild Bikers (with 4 Guld Trikes)
- Robots
- Thunderfires
- 2 Overlords (in separate formations)
- 1 Colossus

3 Games against an ork horde and two space marines (one with air assault troops)

The colossus got a lot of attention but has hard to killl being fearless. However, I failed to protect using nearby units. The warriors died a lot but i managed to keep them mostly in good cover that helped but they are mostly useless except as cannon fodder in support of other units.
The guild trikes being now free are great. I used 4 because i didn´t had any more. The MW really made a difference in threat potential.
The thunderfires were always avoided being protected against air assault and teleporters by a surrounding warrior formation. But I still think they are quite weak. Nothing wrong with that.
The gyros are still my favourite toys. The mixed formations make them cheaper and usefull for spotting and pop up long range sniping.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.5 DRAFT
PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 5:41 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 10:34 am
Posts: 141
Location: Sweden
Moscovian wrote:
OR... They could be guarded by Tarantulas...


That's somewhat what I suggested when i wanted Thunderfires to be an upgrade to support weapons.
The opposite works equally good for me. Thunderfire gettinging support weapons as upgrades.

(the only problem there is how do you count the allotted superheavy points, do the tarantulas count towards those aswell?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.5 DRAFT
PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2014 9:38 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 7:29 pm
Posts: 181
settra wrote:
I honestly don't like seeing the WE with CC 5+.

I meant 4+ the opposite ;D


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.5 DRAFT
PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2014 2:51 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:59 pm
Posts: 196
Location: Edinburgh
I am sorry for asking that perhaps unnecessary question again, but there are a couple of changes I got a bit confused with and I am not sure wether they are typos or serious changes:

1. Where are the exo armour troops - totally gone?
2. Why are squats armed worse, compared to the compendium (6+ over all here, 5+ in the compendium) Is there another list and I don´t get it?

Again my apologies for that :)

_________________
Image


My Specialist Games blog: http://gemana.wordpress.com/
My youtube channel: http://www.youtube.com/channel/UClbU-8oQsI7kdtt-eoF6VTQ


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.5 DRAFT
PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 12:53 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 9:58 pm
Posts: 81
Hmm, i have some Questions:

my english is not the best but

Quote:
every other(?) stand carries a Missile Launcher Weapon


It is like the Imperial Guard Guyz?

why not:

Quote:
One unit in every two has a Missile Launcher Weapon. Count up the number of Warrior units in the
Missile Launcher 45cm AP5+/AT6+ formation that can fire at the target and divide by 2 (rounding up) to find the number of Missile Launcher shots you may take.


It make the Rule more clear for new Players like me.

Quote:
1. Where are the exo armour troops - totally gone?

Good Question. They are a typical Squat Unit.

Termite: what is: Unit is longer part of the formation? Maybe Unit is longer not part of the formation?

Hellbore: why have the Hellbore not Thick Rear Armour. Most of the Squat War Engines have it. It would make the Hellbore make more resistent to save the Units inside the Hellbore.

Stubborn.

Ähmmm.....i think Stubborn is a big disadvantage for all Squats.

First, they are slow...very slow.. they can not get out of the 30 cm away of enemy Formation. For Rally after a Engage Action, they get a +3 modifier.

Second, with 15 cm its hard to escape any Enemy Fire.

Yes, Squats are brave and Stubborn but every Grot shot them with hackdown into pieces... They are sitting Ducks.

If they are so disciplined:

- only one move with max. 15 cm.
- Ignore the Rally modifier +1 for Enemy Units within 30cm. (Or halve it to 15 cm) and/or
- halve the Casaulties for Blastmarker if the Unit ist broken (rounding down)

Or should the Rule Stubborn be a disadvantage?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 195 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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:  

cron

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