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

"Greater World" army lists
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=27875		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  Ginger [ Mon Jul 21, 2014 9:36 am ]
Post subject:  "Greater World" army lists
The clue is in the name . . . . . ;D

GW keep putting out new models, changing the stats etc. accompanied each time by a chorus of 'I want one too'. However the E:A standard lists (Marines, IG, Orks and Eldar) are really not the place to put them for many reasons, the main one being to preserve the key 'yardstick' for measuring the integral balance of all E:A lists.

So, perhaps we should have separate "GW" lists for each key race to contain any and all new units created by Grandma Wendy. There are a few thoughts / restrictions, but in principle anything goes . . . . .
  • This list is intended as the point where the stats and costs of new units and formations are debated and formalised.
  • Any and all new GW units will automatically be included.
  • The stats and costs for any unit / formation will be debated on the forums and decided by Poll.
  • Each "GW" list is *Developmental* - and may never become "Approved".
  • Each unit / formation will have a tag to indicate whether it is "approved" by the relevant AC (and possibly the ERC). Once "approved", these units / formations are eligible for addition to E:A lists ** EXCEPT ** the standard E:A lists (Marines, IG, Orks and Eldar) - which must remain unchanged.
    HOWEVER, being 'eligible' does *not* mean they should automatically be added to any list - merely that they can be considered by the appropriate AC or Sub AC
  • We may need a second tag to indicate that an "approved" unit / formation is included in E:A lists, to indicate that the individual Unit stats and costs may not be changed.

The same thing could also be done for other key races (Tau, 'Nids, Squats etc).

If adopted, it goes without saying that this approach means we will need a new E:A list for each of the current "standard" lists, which will start off identical to their counterparts though in time we will be able to add the various new goodies as appropriate . . . .

For simplicity perhaps we could adopt the following naming convention
  • Marines:-
    GW Marines, E:A Standard Marines, E:A Ultramarine Codex
  • Imperial Guard:-
    GW Imperial Guard, E:A Standard Imperial Guard, E:A Steel legion Imperial Guard
  • Etc.
Author:  Hulksmash [ Mon Jul 21, 2014 3:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "Greater World" army lists
I like it!
Author:  jimmyzimms [ Mon Jul 21, 2014 4:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "Greater World" army lists
I wouldn't even call it Developmental or Experimental I'd make it its own "thing"
call it Sandbox or something like that. There's plenty of units that have been debated stats-wise that you can fund in my signature you're welcome to. However many or most have eventually ended up n a list by now.
Author:  Ginger [ Mon Jul 21, 2014 5:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "Greater World" army lists
Totally agree Jimmy - though the later units have never been fielded together. Here I am especially thinking of the Marines with all those Land Raider and Predator variants, or the IG with all the Leman Russ etc. So, perhaps the "Ultramarine" list could indeed include the Storm Talons, Crusader, Redeemer etc - though perhaps not the Baal Predator (as a BA toy), or the Hell Talon (as a IF toy) etc.

I am good with "Sandbox" for the GW lists - one of the main thoughts behind this suggestion is to provide a single folder for all the discussions on Units and their variants - so we can look in a single place rather than having the fragmented discussions across TacComs that often result in differing stats and costs.

This approach also means that people can use an "approved" unit with a greater degree of confidence which in turn may help speed up list development.
Author:  Irisado [ Mon Jul 21, 2014 5:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "Greater World" army lists
If we really have to have new units, then this would be a way to achieve this aim, so thank you for posting a constructive suggestion. It won't help to make things clearer for new players though; indeed it has the potential to add another layer of confusion, so this is something to bear in mind. I still don't think that Epic needs to emulate GW's constant creation of new units though.
Author:  Blip [ Mon Jul 21, 2014 5:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "Greater World" army lists
Great idea !
Author:  GrrArgh [ Mon Jul 21, 2014 7:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "Greater World" army lists
Image
Author:  Kyrt [ Mon Jul 21, 2014 7:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "Greater World" army lists
Well if there is going to be a new list, maybe this is an opportunity to change the paradigm to just have one, including all the chapter specific units/formations. Then there's just "well balanced" approved versions of all the major factions (eg Armageddon astartes), and everything else goes in "the guard list" or "the marine list"
Author:  Ginger [ Mon Jul 21, 2014 7:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "Greater World" army lists
Irisado wrote:
If we really have to have new units, then this would be a way to achieve this aim, so thank you for posting a constructive suggestion. It won't help to make things clearer for new players though; indeed it has the potential to add another layer of confusion, so this is something to bear in mind. I still don't think that Epic needs to emulate GW's constant creation of new units though.


To some extent I agree Irisado - consider the latest "Storm-abortion" that is gracing our forum :D
There is always someone who wants to try it out, irrespective of how ugly or over-powered the GW unit is - and this would provide the appropriate 'safe' place for such discussions.

That said, IMO the Space Wolves thread is definitely *not* the place to discuss the pros and cons of the latest Unit, however good or bad it is. The codex lists should be used to discuss the units to be included, preferably with stats that have gained broad agreement beforehand.

As such I would hope that a folder entitled "GW Sandbox lists", containing the 4+ sandbox lists for each race, would actually help reduce the confusion elsewhere.
Author:  Ginger [ Mon Jul 21, 2014 7:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:
Kyrt wrote:
Well if there is going to be a new list, maybe this is an opportunity to change the paradigm to just have one, including all the chapter specific units/formations. Then there's just "well balanced" approved versions of all the major factions (eg Armageddon astartes), and everything else goes in "the guard list" or "the marine list"

Potentially Kyrt, though not necessarily. Although the new "Ultramarine" list will contain the majority of the units, and the equivalent "IG Steel Legion" list the majority of the IG stuff, there will still be a few units that are exclusive to a particular Marine Codex or IG list. These will be unique for various reasons, eg a particular 'campaign' or planetary configuration ("Mars Pattern" etc).

However, I agree that in principle the "Ultramarine" Codex and the "Steel Legion" lists should contain all the "standard" units, including any new ones that pass muster in the relevant 'sandbox'.
Author:  Hulksmash [ Mon Jul 21, 2014 7:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "Greater World" army lists
I'd recommend making a sand box list for the following:

-Chaos
-Daemons (Could be included above)
-Space Marines
-Dark Angels
-Space Wolves
-Blood Angels
-Inquisition (This includes Grey Knights, Inquisition, Deathwatch should it ever happen, etc)
-Sisters of Battle (Could be included above but isn't really a branch of the inquisition)
-Imperial Guard
-Orks
-Tyranids
-Necrons
-Tau
-Eldar
-Dark Eldar

One of each of the current main races. In those I'd include any new unit they get by codex but also by supplement/dataslate. The biggest issue would be getting the intiial lists up and running. And then you'd only be talking about adding 1-2 units per army every few years (since some are infantry that have no notable difference from previous selections).
Author:  Hulksmash [ Mon Jul 21, 2014 7:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "Greater World" army lists
Or you could combine all SM units (regardless of factiion) into a single catch-all. Depends on if you are making lists or just making lists of units if you know what I mean.
Author:  jimmyzimms [ Mon Jul 21, 2014 7:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "Greater World" army lists
This is not a "dev spike" or branch of the specific lists, mate so having a sandbox for DA doesn't make sense. The idea is for a catch-all for fun only list set up by faction (Imperial Guard, Marines, Orks, etc) that people that want to play with some crazy new fangled contraption from GW can, in some semblance of order.
Author:  Hulksmash [ Mon Jul 21, 2014 8:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "Greater World" army lists
So all deviant codex units would be in the universal list? I'm curious because if not then the comment about the space wolf new flyer being discussed in the SW Dev forum being the wrong place doesn't make sense.

I'm good either way and still like the idea tremendously. Just seems some people are viewing differently than others so locking it down before starting is good :)
Author:  jimmyzimms [ Mon Jul 21, 2014 8:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: "Greater World" army lists
The SW thread chosen was wrong as it's a thread dedicated to the final approval push by the AC, not a generic SW development thread (or it's own thread in Astartes forum). Good, bad or whatever, Space Wolves development is done and we're validating the AC's chosen list.

These kitchen sink lists we're talking about here are the EA functional equivalent of being unbound lists ;)
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/