What reason (besides personal preference) is there to use the Destructor list instead of the War Gryphonnes list?

The War Gryphonnes list is basically balanced and with the VP idea is a good, tournament ready list. It is the obvious choice for the first Epic Armageddon supplement to feature a Titan Legion.

Any previous attempt to further limit titan weapons has been rejected by the majority. Certain members have always wanted to follow the available fluff but have been out-voted. It would be better if we could just leave that side of things behind us and concentrate on what we, the majority of players, clearly prefer.

Having 2 lists could (and probably will) cause confusion and does not reflect the majority opinion on what we want from a Titan Legion list.

The Legio Destructor list brings nothing new to the table and therfore is not really worthy of becoming a variant list.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

- The level of balance should be finer due to better control over points costs / weapons.
- It's got a shot at becoming tournament approved in the UK.
- I think the Carapace Landing Pad diminishes tactical complexity, and makes Support Missiles non-viable.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

The War Gryphonnes list is finely balanced or surely it wouldn't be approved for the 2012 Army Book.

If EUK want a Titan list then let them use the Destructor list as an official EpicUK list.
The War Gryphonnes really should be the first list published in a NetEA supplement.

Anyway, it's late here and I'm off to bed.
No doubt there'll be plenty for me to read here in the morning!
Good night fellas.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

I'd like to add my support, and I'm only adding it once to give another voice, to the wish to use the Griffons list instead of the Destructor.

The danger of someone new to Epic coming across the Titan Supplement online and assuming that Destructor is the "main" ATML list, since this other one is just a footnote like the collector's edition models in the main book is too great, IMO.

Now, it appears you are set on using the Destructor list, or some form of it. If you do, an editor's note on the opposing page explaining it's relation to the War Gryphons list would be a huge help. Basically a "This list is not the official NetEA Titan Legion list. However, I feel it should be better balanced, for tournament play especially. If you wish to use the official NetEA ATML list instead, you can find it on pgXX, or visit Taccoms." type disclaimer.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

SG that's very like what I intend.

Indy, there's "balanced enough for tournament play", and there's "as balanced as I can possibly make it". I'm a bit of a perfectionist.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Well you all can guess my opinion

But the problem is:
Usually we have core armie sin the cure rulebook and one new core army and 2+ variant armies in a supplement. At least in official books.
Raiders introduced TWO new core armies and only one variant army.
Siege introduced TWO new variant armies and NO new core army.

But as all these armies are(where) available as nice bound books instead of PDFs they are pretty much prominent (apart from Barans and Feral Orks as these models are exceedingly expensive).

I guess we have to release the Epic Armies Book first. If possible as a nice bound coloured book with pretty pictures too. It won't have a background story as the previous books but as a book it hase some kind of prominent and "official" status.

If after this E&C finishes his new supplement i guess theimpact of a new variant Titan Legion army list wouldn't be that big as if he would intriduce it before the Epic Armies Book.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Hi- I'm recovering from eye operation so not online for long.

I have said before my preference for War Griffons list as opposed to one driven by W40k. But this is E&C's project and if he is willing to devote his own time and effort to the supplement then it is only fair that he gets to make the supplement in the way he wants. If anyone else has different view then i am sure they could write their own supplement accordingly.

I am concerned generally about the way that we have multiple lists due to Net EA / EUK, and I would be concerned that having 2 AMTL lists is confusing. I would love to see a generally accepted AMTL list in a supplement. I would have preferred the War Griffons list to be that commonly accepted list. But I understand that EUK would nt accept War Griffons list.

So the question is-will EUK accept the Legio Destructor list? If not, then it will have been pointless. If so, then it will have been worthwhile and we will have got a commonly accepted AMTL list. My worry is that we go ahead and plump for the restricted list and then EUK still don't accept it.

So I just hope E&C's efforts will result in an EUK approved AMTL list. Either way, despite my reservations, I will support and be appreciaitive of his efforts in getting this supplement finished.

Cheers

James

Just for a different view, I think more lists, not less is the way to go - several, more restricted lists can be a very good way to have variety without sacrificing game balance.

Of course, de facto "main lists" (Steel Legion, Biel-tan as well as the more obvious Ghazkul's Warhorde and Codex Marines) hinder this, but that doesn't mean that it's the right way to go.

I still dont get the restriction on a Reaver not being able to equip itself as per the current 'official' FW Epic Model, i.e. with 2x TLD's and MRL (or AML).
I mean with all the talk about making this official - this is a sign of the downfall of basing this off the FW Army books.
Its more like Warhammer 40K FW Imperial Armour 6mm scale, than anything to do with Epic Armageddon. The current EA Reaver has a fit out that i guess is more 'official' than anything related to shoe horning a titan into 40k rules...

I gotta admit, and sorry for the language, but i think some of the changes are a little retarded, and only for changes sake. It boggles belief that we are changing a list solely due to the work of a different game system, ie 40k, incumbent with its own limitations defining what titans can be equipped with or not.

Also the attitude thats been displayed, i.e. its my funds/time that is creating the book so i get to put what i want out there doesnt sit well with me.
You're not calling this release "E&C's Homebake EA Campaign Supplement". It's being marketed as an 'official' supplement for whats left of EA on the net... And in my opinion that carries with it more weight and even though its your time and $$$, NetEA (or whatever the current existence of EA is called) is not solely your creation.
To go ahead with a list that is gonig to be viewed as more official, and it will be, then i think the list should be a clear favourite with the experience players and list creators here.

The AMTL list should be sold as THE list, like the generic Space Marine list is. And any other Titan list, should be viewed as supplemental, like the White Scars or whatever. This is how it needs to be displayed in the book.

I am sorry if i offended anyone, especially E&C, however this is a item of much debate and many many concerns raised here are being effectively brushed off - despite the vague offer of listening to feedback...

Tee

2x tld & an aml is not a legal configuration in 40k

Nor do FW sell a model with that configuration in Epic or 40k (Nor have they ever sold a model with that configuration in Epic or 40k, that's only ever been a configuration available to the GW metal Reaver).



Your project that you are spending hundreds of hours writing is retarded. Your decisions have no basis in logic. Now do what I say.



Both lists are going to be in the supplement.


Here's a tip: Don't call someone's actions "retarded" and then apologise for possibly maybe potentially offending them. It doesn't seem very genuine.




The Official output of the NetEA project is the Armies Book.

It will be released before 2012, and it will contain the War Gryphonnes list.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Thats my error there.
I don't own the FW model, like most people who have played Epic, we own the GW model that has been around for 25 years.
And again, saying that it's not a 'legal config in 40k' means bugger all. Its shoe horning a large machine meant for large scale battles into a skirmish game - with all the inherent problems associated with limited rule mechanics and FW rewriting fluff to fit whatever weapons they decide to make or not make...


I don't understand what you're trying to say here. At best, you're having a lend of me here...


And what will be the (likely) text prefacing the AMTL and LD list?

Tee

I'm getting some positive noises so far.
If EUK end up rejecting it, then things as regards the supplement will probably change.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

The War Gryphonnes list preface will say "Approved due to its attempt to cater to almost every Titan Configuration thought up by GW over the last 25 years!"

The Legio Destructor list preface will say "This list is a little retarded"

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I don't need a tip, thanks for the backhander...

The retarded comment was due to the immense frustration, passion and utter denial by yourself of anything that's been raised as a concern coming close to a valid argument in your eyes... Thats the cause of whacking 'retarded' in the statement.

What i find amazing, is that this sub forum is for NetEA, this supplement is for NetEA yet there is obivously a need to pander to (parts of a?) Epic UK scene that believe the current list unbalanced. Hence the LD list.
What?!
So if enough players in Oz jump up and down, then there'll be a revison of the LD list, and publish it as NetEA..? Thats a downward spiral.
Lets fix up the current list, with some of the suggestions listed.

Or let EpicUk make their own branded AMTL list...

Tee

Thanks for calling my decision retarded, making changes just for change's sake, and then not apologising, then.

You can be assured that you have hit upon the very best method to get your concerns across and engage in productive discussion.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter