Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

175pt 4 strong Aspect fms
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=18216		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  mattthemuppet [ Wed Apr 21, 2010 4:09 am ]
Post subject:  175pt 4 strong Aspect fms
So, what's the deal, eh? I wasn't around in the olden days when the current lists were hashed out, but I can't figure out why 6 and 8 strong Aspect fms have 1 stand for 37.5pts, but Ulthwe (and possibly some others) get stuck with 43.75pts per stand (or even more dweebily, a 16% increase). I mean, it's not like 4 stand formations are that much tougher than 6 or 8, and the popcorn argument doesn't wash either, as these 4 strong fms are always as support fms.

Has anyone playtested 150pt 4 strong aspect fms? Are they over powered? Other than sticking 'em in a Vampire, teleporting (Hawks) or jumping out of a gate, you always have to add wave serpents which, with an Exarch is 300pts. Always felt that was a bit of stretch..
Author:  Chroma [ Wed Apr 21, 2010 4:18 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 175pt 4 strong Aspect fms
There's two "aspects" at play here:

1) Fluff: the two lists that utilize the 4-unit Aspect Troupe, Iyanden and Ulthwé, are known for having fewer Aspect Warriors than other Craftworlds, so they pay a bit of a premium for them.

2) Balance: the armies are also paying a slight premium of having two formations with the same number of units as a Warhost, so you can pack on the activations.

So, yes, 150 point Troupes have been tested, extensively, and the benefit they grant via popcorning, airdropping, and teleporting is precisely why they're 175 points.

I actually tend to equip them with Falcons in the 4-strong Troupes: my four Dark Reapers and four Falcons Troupe have never disappointed me.
Author:  mattthemuppet [ Wed Apr 21, 2010 4:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 175pt 4 strong Aspect fms
bah, reason and rationality are poor sops to my addled brain.

Honestly though, with the 2 for 1 restriction in the Ulthwe list, can you really popcorn with Aspects? If you could, would you really want to?

Besides, I don't see many Biel-Tan players using Wraithguard, does that mean their cost should be upped?

Grumble grumble
Author:  Kealios [ Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:52 am ]
Post subject:  Re: 175pt 4 strong Aspect fms
lol Matt, I feel you. When I first picked up Eldar a year ago, I did the same math as you, and have the handwritten calculations next to each of the Aspect formations in each of the Eldar lists too :)
Author:  Malakai [ Wed Apr 21, 2010 3:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 175pt 4 strong Aspect fms
I believe that formations and/or units should be individually costed to the list in question. It shouldn't be a simple copy/paste job. Sure the other lists can serve as a baseline, you can't ignore the playtesting that's been done prior to that, but the real question is what are they worth to that particular army list?

Not many people share this view though as it takes a lot more testing and you get people asking, why is this more expensive in this list than that list. ;)
Author:  mattthemuppet [ Wed Apr 21, 2010 4:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 175pt 4 strong Aspect fms
Malakai wrote:
I believe that formations and/or units should be individually costed to the list in question. It shouldn't be a simple copy/paste job. Sure the other lists can serve as a baseline, you can't ignore the playtesting that's been done prior to that, but the real question is what are they worth to that particular army list?

Not many people share this view though as it takes a lot more testing and you get people asking, why is this more expensive in this list than that list. ;)


to be honest though, in all those other lists Aspects are either the same price or cheaper and there are no other price adjustments that I can think of, like for like.

I don't doubt it's been extensively playtested, I've just missed all that and the arguments that went with it. I guess the price fits the fluff in a way, after all I rarely if ever take Aspects with my Ulthwe :)
Author:  mageboltrat [ Wed Apr 21, 2010 4:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 175pt 4 strong Aspect fms
I normally take an Aspect formation in my Iyanden Army. Mainly because I like them, but also whenever I used to play 'Doom of the Eldar' all that was normally left when Yriel finally turned up were the Aspects guarding the Gardens of Tranquility.
Author:  Spectrar Ghost [ Wed Apr 21, 2010 4:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 175pt 4 strong Aspect fms
I take two. Best backup for the dead is the dying.
Author:  nealhunt [ Wed Apr 21, 2010 5:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: 175pt 4 strong Aspect fms
mattthemuppet wrote:
to be honest though, in all those other lists Aspects are either the same price or cheaper and there are no other price adjustments that I can think of, like for like.

I don't doubt it's been extensively playtested, I've just missed all that and the arguments that went with it.

To give a quick summary...

They get as many Exarch slots per stand as Biel Tan, so there's a premium for that compared to 6-unit formations.

4-unit formations are effective as transported formations. They are tough enough to do damage but they only cost 300-400 points so they don't tank your activation count. 6 unit formations are barely workable with transports and 8 unit formations are effectively cost-prohibitive, limiting deployment options.

In air transport, they are as good as an 8-unit formation but end up more flexible afterwards like a Thunderhawk with Devs/Assault that split up after the initial air assault. They don't have the wasted space of a 6-unit formation.

There are a handful of specialty effects as well which work better with 4-unit formations. For example, keeping a single Swooping Hawk formation in reserve until Turn 3 so it can port onto objectives and screen with their Zone of Control is very effective and doesn't require diverting much in the way of assets from the main battle, while using larger formations for the same thing requires keeping more assets off the table.

Obviously, they take a hit on durability but the positives outweigh that.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/