Is there anyway that you could make an obvious indication that certain lists are more experimental than others?

There is no way that the Yme-loc, Iybrasi, and Titan lists are nearly as tested as the big 5. Not to mention that, given the fact that people  have shown the ability to make their own models, we may want to include additional options and/or units to those lists.

I was thinking a big stamp-like watermark in the background of the less tested lists that says "EXPERIMENTAL!" or something to the effect.

Er... each army has a "status" designator stamp in the top, right corner showing exactly that.

There's in order of most tested to least: "Approved", "Development", and "Experimental".  Each army list should have one of those three tags up in the corner.

ALl this will be explained in the foreward to the document when all the drafts are collected together.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Oh, I see now. I didn't notice that the stamps were different. Reading is fundamental.

Maybe if the 'status' word was in a large font, and "Net EA" was in a small font, it would be more obvious.

Once the book is in a final stage, it will be much more obvious.

Thanks for your input!

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

In the Yme-Loc Army List the Chains of Vaul Troupe are 400pts, I would have thought there value would have been 300 or 290pts?

Is this correct Chorma?

As mentioned in another thread, by Neal Hunt,



Concensus on it would be good.

Morgan Vening

DANGIT!  That's a cut-n-paste typo from the Autarch.

Exarchs should *NOT* provide a MW extra attack, just a regular one.

Good thing this is just a DRAFT!

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Any up dates on this?

Noticed it yesterday...


Why again 4+?
In the old NetEA Statlist i used it was 3+ like in Swordwind.

8xMW 4+ realy sucks for this bunch of points imho.

_________________
www.ttc-cosmophobia.de

The 400 point value is currently "correct" for playtesting; it's better to go "too high" than "too low" for experimental formations.

Adding the fourth Night Spinner *doubles* the number of templates the formation can put out, making them comparable to a Whirlwind Detachment which has a value of 300 points (yes, in the Marine list, so the comparison isn't fully accurate.).  With the weapon having disrupt, the addition of the Firestorm to the Troupe and the fact that they're all skimmers edges them closer to 400 points.

I'd love to see some playtests of this though!

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Could be a possible typo, can't see anything in the errata or the NetEA changes, but I do seem to remember this discussion.

Looking at both the Hojyn and Markconz handbooks, they've both got it listed at MW4+, so that means it's coming from *somewhere*.

I'm heading off on vacation so I don't have time to sift through the forums right now.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Nerfing the revenant's was discussed quite a lot during the great 1.8 debate. I'm sure the MW 4+ came from those discussion.

Personally I thought it a step too far but the "They are too good when the sustain" camp won the debate IIRC.

As Jervis threw it out I thought it was nixed?

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Jervis didn't take quite a lot of the 1.8 changes but some are still in the other craft world lists.

I have to say I stopped using Revenants a while ago. They are just to brittle most of the time.