Gents, after a shitty personal first half of the year i am back in a position to wor the list again. I have already been discussing it and will get a new draft up pretty soon.

I have submitted a new draft to playtesters including some minor stat and point changes, and a new special rule 'demigod' to cover makng primarchs as awesome as you want them to be.

Hey guys,

Get on board on this as Fattdex needs a good corps of play testers to assist with list development. We have a couple of groups in Oz who are testing, need a little international support to get some even feedback for development.

Blind Pig and Westgamer crew, can you get some games in as well to add to the Canberra and Melbourne testing going on.

Dex, pressure is on mate to get a play test Doc out to give us some firm direction so your feedback is balanced on what was tested in each area.
Cheers
Aaron

Yep i have saturday to do that. Will put out the release that i gave you with a playtesters sidebar. Maybe today if i dont have any work on again ;-)

Playtesters pack has been released! Please visit the top post to download.

The latest Space Marine Legions 0.6 playtesters pack is available to download from the link below

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B27Fsz ... sp=sharing

It has also been uploaded to the top post.

as always, please direct any data to fattdex@hotmail.com

Looking good - expect some playtest feedback soon!
Frank

And again, thanks to some prompt feedback picking up on my errors, I have uploaded a new point version (0.6.1)

Please download it from the following link, or top post

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B27Fsz ... sp=sharing

I've been meaning to give you some feedback and corrections on the list for yonks but never got round to it, about time I did. I keep up with the HH books and would like play Epic Heresy sometime. You've mad a good start at the list and updating it, but there's a lot wrong with it at the moment which needs fixing before I'd be happy to play it. Feedback:

The Fellblade should be DC4 not DC3. Going by the Forge World stats it has identical armour values to a Baneblade but the Baneblade has 9 Hull Points (corresponding closely to DC in epic) while the Fellblade has 12 Hull Points.

A Spartan should have a transport capacity of 5 stands - it can carry 25 marines.

I don't see the justification for the Typhon having Walker and think it should lose it. A Vindicator has it because of it's dozer blade but the Typhon doesn't have one and other vehicles on the same chassis don't have walker.Ignore this, have since read the Crushing Weight rule and see why it has walker.

The Sicaran Venator and Cerebus's Neutron Laser should have disrupt to represent the shock pulse it has. The Neutron Laser has had epic stats for years already on the Valdor in the Vraks list and it has disrupt there.

Delete Predator Annihilators from the list, they didn't exist at the time of the Heresy! They were invented by the Space Wolves as a field conversion thousands of years after the Heresy. Lookup the wiki entry on the tank or see the army list in the HH books and you'll find no Annihilator.

Please abandon and remove the Fury of the Legion attack! I really, really, really hate it in the list! All the precedent is that Bolters in Epic are purely FF weapons. The HH special rule just allows them to shoot twice in one turn to not fire in their next, their overall number of shots stays the same as 40k SMs and special rules like this (that are very common in modern 40k rule-writing) are irrelevant on an Epic scale and shouldn't be included. Space Wolves Grey Hunters have no ranged weapons and work fine like that and Tactical Marines here should too.

The Whirlwind Hyperios looks to be a renamed Hunter, which I think is the best way to do it rather than inventing new stats for it. I think you've made a typo with it's FF though - a Hunter only has FF6+ and this probably should too rather than 5+?

The Medusa should have 5+ armour same as the basilisk. It was given 6+ due to vulnerable open-topped crew (whereas the Armageddon pattern basilisk has the enclosed crew compartment that protects them hence the 5+) but the power armoured marine crew would justify 5+.

There's a whole range of shooty weapons available for a Contemptor Dreadnought, both ones useful against tanks and ones useful against infantry. It's inappropriate to stat it armed with a twin Lascannon as this only reflects one side. It should be averaged to be armed with a twin-linked autocannon (a valid armament for it) just like the various available weapons for Devestators get averaged to missile launchers.

Assuming a Jetbike stand to consist of 3 Bikers (the normal amount which GW used for bikers in EpicA) then they should have 3 heavy weapons, not 1. Bump their cost up consequently but please stat them accurately then work out a fair cost from there. This is a particularly important one to me as if I collect a HH marine army it'll be White Scars.

A unit/stand of 5 Terminators is only allowed to carry a single heavy weapon, please can this be corrected in their stats here? This has always been the case for Terminators but they screwed up in the EpicA rulebook and statted them with 2 heavy weapons in error and frustratingly/stupidly this hasn't been corrected since. Since you have control over the list and it's inspired by but separate from regular EpicA hopefully you'll fix this here. In terms of relative balance Terminators in Epic have always been a bit too powerful anyway – they're deadly in CC which is fine, they don't need Devestator numbers of shots as well, it's too much.

A Storm Eagle's Vengenance launchers have 48” range and so should be 45cm range. The Storm Eagle's wing mounted weapons have been missed off. It comes with either 4 x Vengence Rockets or 2 x wing twin-linked Lascannons. Out of the two I'd suggest the wing Lascanons All the Storm Eagle models FW have shown have the 2 x twin-linked Lascannons, as does the various shots of them throughout the books and they seem to be part of the archetypical one. I think they need to loose their AA attack on their Heavy Bolters though – unlike the fully rotatable ones on Thunderhawks the front guns are fixed in place with no ability to move or track targets at all unless the whole aircraft turns to face and giving them an all round AA bubble for this would be silly. FW are virtually guaranteed to bring out a HH fighter aircraft at some point to take care of that, leave AA out from here.

A Contemptor Dreadnought's Kheres Assault Cannons have 6 shots each so 12 in total or 3 times as many as a normal 4 shot assault cannon, which they're otherwise identical to. It would be more accurate to stat them as Kheres Assault Cannons 30cm 3 x Ap5+/AT5+.

FW describe the Sicaran tanks as being a “high-speed ‘destroyer’ tank” with “ferrocious speed”. It has the fast special rule, which the Predator does not. I say it deserves to have a 35cm move.

Damn GlynG, do you have sort of 40K-autism? ;-)

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/

"You have a right to be offended" - Steve Hughes
"Your feelings are hurting my thoughts" - Aron Flam

Minor correction - Terminator units of five only being able to take a single heavy weapon is pretty recent in terms of 40k background, off the top of my head it's 5th ed. for vanilla Marines and sixth ed. for Dark Angels.

EDIT - yep, just checked the 3rd edition Marine codex (the current one when EA came out) and Terminators could take two heavy weapons.

_________________
The Wargaming Trader
NetEA Death Guard Army Champion

Just noting for fattdex that we're using both the above in the Raptors Ambush list. I want to keep the two in alignment somewhat as much as is possible across the centruies . Will be paying close attention to your findings with them!

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

The Typhon has a max range of 48” in 40k or half that if it moves. 30cm doubled to 60cm seems too long ranged a translation of the gun. Could the gun have 20cm range so 40cm indirect? That would fit better. I know it's not a conventional range, but I don't think it matters that much as a one-off for an important weapon system myself.


Hmm... I wouldn't say autism but I'm a bit of a perfectionist in some ways if that fits? Also easily distracted and good at wasting time on things online when I really should be doing other things...

Actually it's not at all - in both 1st ed. 40K/Rogue Trader and the 2nd edition 40k SM codex Terminators were limited to 1 heavy weapon per squad of 5. Background-wise this has never actually changed since. The 3rd and 4th edition codexes allowed two weapons per squad, however their squad size was 5 to 10 in these codexes so a full sized squad would have 1 heavy weapon per 5. The background article focussing on Terminators in Index Astartes IV (from around the time EpicA came out) also noted Terminator heavy weapons as 1 per 5. It's been limited again to 1 in 5 since 2008 and the 5th ed codex and is so in the HH setting too.

While the Deathwing expansion had a standard option to upgrade a five-model squad to two heavy weapons and command squads automatically came with two per five.

GW have never been consistent about Terminators being limited to one heavy weapon per five troopers. As E:A came out in one of the periods where two was possible I don't really see the issue.

If you want E:A lists to match 'current' fluff and restrictions, sure, but 'this has always been the case' is a risky way to word it.


P.S. I'd meant to write 'minor quibble' rather than 'minor correction' in the earlier post, 'correction' made the tone more argumentative than intended.

_________________
The Wargaming Trader
NetEA Death Guard Army Champion