Per base, around the same.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

Nice list!

Given the wide array of fluff, I don't really see the issue with Lictors. There is tremendous variance between the lists from Murphy, Chambers, & Huckelbery. Beastmen, human bombs, Mind Slaves, Squigs, and demonically-possessed Patriarchs have all passed through canon lists.

If you wanted to add some extras, Huckelbery's Genestealer Ark as a SH & some sort of Hybrid Monstrosity, ala the BoLS list, could be neat.

_________________
WAAARGH!!
The Lost & the Dipped

Great list, I look forward to trying it out sometime.

I'm a big fan of GSCs, they have always been one of my favorate 40k forces, but they are tricky to do justice in Epic. I've been trying to think of something big for them but can't really think of anything better than one of the less common guard superheavy tank.

I did have a few other ideas though, this one is more characterful than useful perhaps but I thought it could be fun:

If the army includes both the Magus and Patriarch (perhaps manditory?) then you can only achive 'break thier spirit' by killing both these units, rather than the most expensive formation.

Note with this rule you would only need to kill the two units, not two whole formations.

I thought of this since all the stories about GSCs seem to end the same way - once the big two go down, the brood losses the will to continue fighting.

You could also make them both SCs, giving the army two rerolls a turn to represent the brood telepathy, this would make it a bit more unique and less of a 'guard army with genestealers', but I guess its best to keep the special rules to a minimum.

Lastly, I would consider giving the army SR 3 since they lack the heavy gear of a proper guard army, are well organised thanks to brood telepathy and often catch the enemy by surprise with trators in thier ranks etc..

I already have a rule in place for the death of the Patriarch; all formations take a BM; I think that's sufficient to represent the demoralising effect.

I don't want to do anything tied to the Tournament Scenario like affecting the BTS, since this list is designed for a supplement where there'll be lots of scenarios that won't necessarily have a BTS goal.



That has been suggested before, but I'm loathe to break with convention and have two supremes. Perhaps the Patriarch could only use his reroll for genestealers or hybrid formations, and the Magus for the human ones? Just spitballing.



Mmm, equally though they're mostly not trained soldiers, which swings it the other way. I'd rather represent the sneakiness through other ways, like the teleporting genestealer formation idea, or a note allowing more formation types to garrison etc.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

Huh, I'd never seen the Huckelbery list before... The Genestealer Ark seems really cool, it could be a DC2 or AV alternative to the Patriarch.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

Always loved genie cult, an army with alot of personality, heaps of crappy troops and stolen vehicles with some nasty genestealer suprises.

I dont know much about the list but I do like the concept of teleporting genestealers vs lictors. lictors just dont seem right to be but genestealers coming up through sewers and the like is very easy to picture.

I think the difficulty with GC is to make them different from just being 'purple imp guard' which can be difficult, I am going to brainstorm some thoughts, feel free to ignore them or call them silly but just to throw some ideas out there.

Defenders

Generally cult armies are on the defensive they are happy building their nest until the fleet arrives so how about

- pay points for light fortifications and booby traps (no heavy fortifications just light and mild booby traps to represent non experty fortifications and booby traps/mines)
- maybe they can garrison different units than normal or maybe their deplyment zone is further onto the board?
- in attacker/defender scenarios maybe they are always the defender?
- they always get to choose the side of the table to deploy but they always deploy 1st

Sabotage, Rebellion and Confusion

When gene cults pop out and say 'were here!' they cause all of the above. Maybe we can use this to effect the opponent at the start of the game. (game theory - instead of boosting the cults strength with WM etc, remove the strength of the opponent) Now i think alot of us would remember the old 40k 2nd ed tyrannid start of game charts and how annoying and frustrating they were but i am not suggesting anything as powerful as they were but maybe things like...

- At start of game some units start with a blast marker from sabotage/ambushes. They are crappy troops performing those ambushes so no damage is done but the formations have already come under fire. Maybe the army gets these for free, or maybe it has to pay for them? dunno
- Maybe each turn formations of brood brothers have the chance of growing as more civvies turn up and add to their numbers?

Well i better get back to work, there are just some thoughts to get the brain ticking over, maybe there is a good idea in there maybe not but hopefully it will provide something to think about

Weaponry

I always picture GC with a hodge podge of weaponry which is very basic and many civilian vehicles/buggies which can be destroyed easily.

A couple of thoughts after looking at the list

Heavy Bolters for genestealer hybrids - hybrids do usually have the best weapons as they have been 'touched by god' and so the get presents from the broodmembers so maybe hvy bolters do suit?

Brood Fire Support - taking the above into consideration, should the fire support be Hybrid fire support? they were back in 40k but is it applicable in Epic? not sure..... i guess if they can fight in large scale there should be alot of hybrids to support the large brood so maybe they should be the heavy weapons carriers?

Civilian vehicle - What does this vehicle represent? it can carry 2 stands, have the same armour as a Siegfried light tank. Is it supposed to represent the old picture of the armoured Magus limo? if so then maybe we need an armoured Civvie vehicle and an unarmoured one? I love the idea of having heaps of civvie vehicles with no or little armour and a gun bolted to the roof which is what i think alot of the vehicles that a brood can commandeer would be. (Maybe BRUENNHILDE style stats?)

GC usually do have access to PDF weaponry which is generally the basic models that guard can access Russ (no variants), basilisk, chimera, maybe a SHT, hellhounds, sentinels, griffins so you have most of them which is good maybe the others could be considered or maybe they dont suit.

Back to work.....

I think I'm probably going to go in that direction. Personally I think lictors fit fine, but others seem to disagree, so I'll probably replace them with teleporting genestealers.



Yup. The first idea I had with the list was to allow upgrades for support formations in order to get away from that feeling, and so allow some weird and wonderful formations.



Not sure I agree with this. This army list represents a cult in full planetary rebellion, trying to break all resistance before the hive fleet arrives. That's not all that defensive.



Interesting, but probably not something I'm going to go for at this stage.



I'm considering a special rule to allow just about anything to garrison.



Again, I disagree with your reasoning on this one.



Too scenario dependant.



I'm not in favour of automatic bonuses at the start of the game. I'd rather represent their sneakiness etc on the board where the opponent has a chance to counter it.



A bit too oblique I think.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

That's about my view too.



Yeah, as you mention, they always get higher tech weaponry than the brood brothers, so I think Heavy Bolters are about right.



It's an interesting idea, and one I will consider. I can see both viewpoints on this.



It's intended as a generic category that could represent anything from a flatbed truck with a gun bolted on top, to a stolen military vehicle, or even *shudder* a limo. It's similar in concept and stats to the Lost and the Damned Land Transporter. Basically it's something along the lines of the sort of cobbled together vehicles you get in Necromunda, or the vehicles seen in footage from the recent Libya conflict.



Agreed, and that's why I have a selection of PDF weaponry available. I have to balance this against the desire not to be purple guard though, so I deliberately kept the selection limited.



Thanks for your input, there are some interesting ideas here.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

Thanks for reviewing my suggestions!



Is it worthwhile just copying the Land transporter and stats from the Alpha list (and others) to keep them all the same? It would mean changing the weaponry to 'heavy weapons' with 6+AP/6+AT.

In that vain is it worthwhile bringing the GC cultist i line with the other cultists as well?

I think it might be best, especially since the cultists are a hodgepodge of people and weaponry. having 'heavy weapons' represents a mixed bag of armaments whereas specifying 'missile launchers' seems a little.....organized if you know what i mean .

I think what both of those above changes would also do is lock in those stats as 'legitimate' as they are the same over multiple army lists

I just read the other thread where you detail your dislike for the 'heavy weapons' entry.

I understand where you are coming from and generally I agree for most situations but in a cultist list of ragtag weaponry i think that giving a specific name complicates and regiments the list more than it needs to. I also think that 'heavyweapons' more accrately describes the range of weapons they are armed with.

If you insist on naming weapons then I would suggest that Brood Brothers weaponry be replaced with heavy stubbers as I dont think Missile launchers are going to be that prevalent in a civilian uprising with some PDF weaponry scenario. The majority of Brood Brothers weaponry is probably going to come from police/home us/gangs which would be more AP than AT (with some PDF thrown in of course).

I would also be the case for the transporter weaponry(as you curently have it) but i would think that some vehicles would have missile launcher equivalents. Is it worthwhile looking at something like a +5 point upgrade from twin heavy stubber to ML? or maybe a free upgrade for 1 in 3 or similar (taking into account that the price of the transporter may have to rise to take into account the Stubber, maybe 15 points each which is maybe a little over costed but balanced by every 3rd transporter getting the ML?)

EDIT - or is the above +5 point upgrade and also the 1/3 rule such a minor diference that you just call them 15 point transports with ML? prbably be easier and keeping with the KISS rule

I was also just looking at your aircraft stats and they seem very poor. Just as an example the fighter is the same points as an Ork fighter Bomber which has alot better armaments and also some armour. What are your thoughts on the aero side of things? or are they not being concentrated on much until the 'core' of the list is settled down?

Or is it worth more, comparing it to the other option of the Chimera at 25 points

Chimera has 1 more FF, it effectively has a 30cm ML (multi laser) and an extra HB

In range the ML is better to start getting those BM on the enemy.

It doesnt sit well that civilian cultists are firing Space Marine statistic wepons at good range, plus I would prefer to keep it cheap and have more of a horde feel to it.

Do we leave the ML off of the transports entirely and suck it up that they just dont have much AT at all?


Personally i think the 'heavy weapons' entry fixes alot of problems

in my experience with genestealer cults in 40k, the tank-killing was done by either stolen tanks, or up close with claws, fists, and fangs.

in epic, it seems to me that missile launchers and AT are probably not needed, compared to the assault capabilities of the army, especially with its guerilla genestealers

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

No. I hate the generic "Heavy Weapons" that doesn't match the stats of any known weapons. I believe it's a mistake in the LaTD list, and it won't be happening in this list.



Again, no. I hate the generic heavy weapons, and I prefer these stats.



Missile Launchers is effectively already a generic catagory; it has the same stats as an autocannon for example, and can easily represent a mix of weapons (which is why marines and guard are both armed with AP5+/AT6+ weapons)



The only other list they're in is LaTD, which in my view is a total mess of a list. I'm not willing to compromise this list for a weak veneer of officiality.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

That case can be made for absolutely any army list. Why are all marines carrying missile launchers, they should have a mix etc. It doesn't hold water; you give them a typical weapon, and ideally one that can represent other weapons in the process. That's the way every other list does it (other that orks, who have a good reason since every weapon is unique so have to be put into generic catagories). To me it's the LaTD that stands out as a sore thumb, not this list.



Missile launchers are a common underhive weapon, and the stats also neatly represent other heavy weapons well. They're as close to a generic heavy weapon stat as you can get.



I like the twin heavy stubber on the transports, it's nicely low-tech and reminicent of the sort of improvised vehicles used in libya etc. Again, the stats can also represent a heavy bolter.

You're getting too tied down on heavy weapons. Epic just isn't the game for customising each base's weapons.



The aircraft are directly copied from the mossinian list; they're the established stats for a PDF airforce. They're meant to be weak.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread