Tactical Command | View topic

Page 1 of 2

[ 17 posts ]

Go to page 1, 2 Next

View unanswered posts | View active topics View unread posts | View new posts | View your posts

Saim-Hann

v_guesne

Post subject: Saim-Hann

Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 7:38 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 10:10 am
Posts: 9

hello,

I played Saim-Hann for about one year, and every player I met felt this army list really unbalanced (and I didn't even played the "flying scorpions" !).

I would like to know its current status : dead, broken, still in playtesting ?

On the Epic_fr mailing list, we thought main issues were about the WindRider Hosts :
- too big (up to 16 units)
- too cheap (6 jetbikes for only 125 pts)
- too much advantages (init 1+, farseer,wild rider, ...)

So we made this modifications that I will try to playtest soon

WINDRIDER WARHOST: 225 points Init : 2+
A Windrider Warhost consists of one Wild Riders unit and five Jetbike units.
In addition the formation may include:
3 Jetbike units or 3 Shining Spears for +100 points
1 Farseer on Jetbike unit for +50 points (+50 points for Supreme commander ability)
Any number of Jetbike units in the formation may be replaced with Vypers at no additional points cost.

What do you think about this ?

And about draft ideas ( not yet discussion about it on epic_fr mailing list ...):

- bring back rangers troupe (why not on vypers ?) ?
- create troupe/host mixing guardians in waveserpents and jetbikes/vypers ?
- keeping WindRider Host init 1+, removing the farseer option, putting it in guardian host (see upon) ?

Best regards

Vincent

PS : sorry for my poor language ...

Top

Markconz

Post subject: Saim-Hann

Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 9:04 am

Purestrain

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand

Hi Vincent, wellcome to the epicomms!

Personally I think your ideas from the French epic list make a lot of sense. I have proposed similar ideas in the past, so it is good to see others coming up with them independently.

I'm not sure what the current status of the Sam Hainn list is. MC23 is the champion in charge and may be able to advise you on future timing of development.

Also your language is great so no need to apologise :;):

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/

Top

The_Real_Chris

Post subject: Saim-Hann

Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 9:24 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London

With issues with the main Eldar list seeking resolution, I think development is on hold. Doesn't stop you though developing an Eldar SH list (the champion system has somewhat faded away I think, and any balanced good list has a chance to get official), but first check out discussion on the current list (and specifically spirit stones or simply removing them from the GT army list).

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' Ã¢â‚¬â€œ Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Top

Honda

Post subject: Saim-Hann

Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 1:37 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 1891
Location: Katy, Republic of Texas

@v_guesne

Welcome aboard!

Having been on the business end of the SH Eldar, I think your proposals are steps taken in the right direction. Our local SH players have on principle, used +2 initiative and that has made them (the Wind Rider hosts) a little more sufferable.

They are an interesting list to play against and are certainly very unforgiving to their opponents.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Top

semajnollissor

Post subject: Saim-Hann

Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 4:22 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm
Posts: 1673
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA

I would think that having init 1+ would be okay if the formation wasn't allowed to take a farseer. If that were the case, the wild riders wouldn't be able to auto-activate on a retain. Should farseers even be in the formation?

Top

Dwarf Supreme

Post subject: Saim-Hann

Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 4:38 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 11147
Location: Canton, CT, USA

Welcome to Epicomms, v_guesne!

Don't worry about the your English; it's fine. Your English is far better than my French ever was.

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

Top

Tactica

Post subject: Saim-Hann

Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 4:44 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241

Vincent,

Welcome to Epicomms!

The ideas are good. We've seen very similar proposals come from several different folks.

Although MC23 is the man in charge of the Eldar craftworld lists, TRC has summed it up well enough. With balance issues in the main list, craftworld development is basically on hold. Its been the concensus that development with lists that use the main list as a source constantly go back to needing problems resolved in the main list before the sub lists can get any good traction.

Unfortunately, there are some problems with getting some solid changes in place for all to test. The largest problem is not having a champion with regular presence here for the main Eldar List. (Tepoc or Sotec)

The one change that has been pretty clear is to start playtesting the main list without Spirit Stones (SS) as suggested by MC23. The goal is to identify whether or not the Eldar have specific units that need the SS rule in tournament games as the entire list definitely does not.

Their are several other changes that have been discussed, but this SS rule is the most pressing one to tackle.

Again, once the main list modifications are ratified, we should see MC23 pick craftworld sub-list devleopment regularly once again. Lets just hope for a quick but EFFECTIVE main list modification effort!

Cheers,

_________________
Rob

Top

nealhunt

Post subject: Saim-Hann

Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 6:11 pm

Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA

v_guesne: I think your host proposal is fine. I do, however, think that they can stand to have a slightly larger host. I think up to 13 would be okay.

Regarding the other suggestions...

I don't know of background material showing Rangers on Vypers. I could be wrong, but I wouldn't want to just add it without reference. Besides, Rangers are out doing their own thing and wouldn't necessarily conform to the standards of a particular craftworld even if they were helping them out temporarily.

A mixed troupe would be fine.

I'm not sure about the Farseer going to Guardians. I simply don't know enough about the Saim Hann background to say for sure.

_________________
Neal

Top

nealhunt

Post subject: Saim-Hann

Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 6:13 pm

Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA

Quote (semajnollissor @ 04 May 2006 (16:22))

Well, there is both background material depicting it and the option in the 40K chart for Farseers on jetbikes. Saim Hann is the only Epic list to date that allows it. It would be a shame from my persepctive to not have the option available somewhere.

_________________
Neal

Top

semajnollissor

Post subject: Saim-Hann

Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 6:50 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm
Posts: 1673
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA

I thought the ultwe list allowed for mounted farseers (black guardians can be mounted, I assumed the farseers could too).

As far as Saim Hann goes, I'd rather see Jetbikes + Farseer at init 2+ OR Jetbikes + Wild Rider at init 1+. My beef is having the wild rider stand in the same formation as the farseers stand; the two character types would seem to be opposing rather than complimentary. I have no problem with farseers on jetbikes in general (though I still plan to use my farseers on vypers instead of some conversion for this model).

Oh, and I'd vote a definity "No" regarding rangers on jetbikes. Fluff concerns aside (and there are many), rangers are supposed to be sneaky. It's hard to be sneaky on a jetbike. A better solution would be to allow foot sloggers in the list, but to force them to be deployed via a wraithgate or as garrisons (rangers and war walkers only). Something along those lines was in one of the original iterations of the list, but it was dropped later on for unclear reasons.

Top

Gotchaye

Post subject: Saim-Hann

Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 2:21 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:25 am
Posts: 59

In fact, Ulthwe is the only list that can't run mounted Farseers. Everyone else's Farseers can take Jetbikes from the armory, but Ulthwe can't take Farseers, only a Seer Council, and they aren't allowed them.

Top

MC23

Post subject: Saim-Hann

Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 4:04 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:27 am
Posts: 174

Quote (v_guesne @ 04 May 2006 (02:38))

hello,

I played Saim-Hann for about one year, and every player I met felt this army list really unbalanced (and I didn't even played the "flying scorpions" !).

I would like to know its current status : dead, broken, still in playtesting ?

On the Epic_fr mailing list, we thought main issues were about the WindRider Hosts :
- too big (up to 16 units)
- too cheap (6 jetbikes for only 125 pts)
- too much advantages (init 1+, farseer,wild rider, ...)

So we made this modifications that I will try to playtest soon

?WINDRIDER WARHOST: 225 points ? ?Init : 2+
? A Windrider Warhost consists of one Wild Riders unit and five Jetbike units.
? In addition the formation may include:
? 3 Jetbike units or 3 Shining Spears for +100 points
? 1 Farseer on Jetbike unit for +50 points (+50 points for Supreme commander ability)
? Any number of Jetbike units in the formation may be replaced with Vypers at no additional points cost.

What do you think about this ?

And about draft ideas ( not yet discussion about it on epic_fr mailing list ...):

- bring back rangers troupe (why not on vypers ?) ?
- create troupe/host mixing guardians in waveserpents and jetbikes/vypers ?
- keeping WindRider Host init 1+, removing the farseer option, putting it in guardian host (see upon) ?

Best regards

Vincent

PS : sorry for my poor language ...

Sub lists are on a back burner right now.

As for your revised Windrider host suggestion
Why would Shining Spears cost the same as extra jet baikes?
If the 1+ initiative is dropped then what about for their air power? Supreme Commander with that would abusive. For now I'm in favor of trying to stay the course with no SC (not that my mind can't be changed in the future.

The follow up question is have you been trying any games with these changes. If not try some because I am interested in what you find. Try the 6 unit formation with the optional adds suggested. Points might have to be raised for this host though. Also try it with out Spirit Stones. I fully expect any changes we see in the future for the core Eldar would have them playing closer to having none than playing with the current rule.

The other ideas I'm not interested in right now for assorted reasons.

_________________
I am MC23

Top

MC23

Post subject: Saim-Hann

Posted: Sat May 06, 2006 4:15 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:27 am
Posts: 174

Quote (Tactica @ 04 May 2006 (11:44))

The one change that has been pretty clear is to start playtesting the main list without Spirit Stones (SS) as suggested by MC23. The goal is to identify whether or not the Eldar have specific units that need the SS rule in tournament games as the entire list definitely does not.

That was not the goal at all. The goal was to stop the debate. A practical goal from this is to see if it really changed wins that much in tournament games and more importantly what happens to Eldar in Non-Tournament games. Also to reinforce or disprove the Eldar "4th turn wilt" is a holistic army issue as the orginal playtesting decided or if anything can be specifically addressed now.

The other goal is to keep the armchair generals from posting on this topic and start playing or shut up.

_________________
I am MC23

Top

semajnollissor

Post subject: Saim-Hann

Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 8:40 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm
Posts: 1673
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA

Quote (Gotchaye @ 05 May 2006 (20:21))

In fact, Ulthwe is the only list that can't run mounted Farseers. ?Everyone else's Farseers can take Jetbikes from the armory, but Ulthwe can't take Farseers, only a Seer Council, and they aren't allowed them.

Well, in 40k your right, but I was talking about the Epic Ulthwe list. (which you might have realized, meaning your comment was just an FYI type post, which is cool).

On a related topic, the new Eldar 40k codex is coming out at the end of the year, and it will probably have all the rule for the different craftworlds. Since the rules reviews for the core rules, main book armies and the swordwind lists will take at least until then, maybe any of the new stuff in the codex can be incorporated into the varient lists.

Top

semajnollissor

Post subject: Saim-Hann

Posted: Sun May 07, 2006 8:41 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm
Posts: 1673
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA

Quote (MC23 @ 06 May 2006 (10:15))

The other goal is to keep the armchair generals from posting on this topic and start playing or shut up.

Good luck with that (says the guilty party).

Top

Print view

Previous topic | Next topic

Page 1 of 2

[ 17 posts ]

Go to page 1, 2 Next

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 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

Jump to:

Saim-Hann

Who is online