Tactical Command :: View topic

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

Latest list http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=70&t=6634	Page 1 of 2

Author:	Chroma [ Fri Dec 16, 2005 5:13 pm ]
Post subject:	Latest list
I like the look of the new list, and thanks for using my Garrison idea! Not sure when I'll get a change to playtest Necrons in the near future as my hands are full of Tau and Tyranids... but I'll try! laugh

Author:	corey3750 [ Fri Dec 16, 2005 5:37 pm ]
Post subject:	Latest list
It just made a whole lot of sense.

Author:	Honda [ Thu Dec 29, 2005 3:52 am ]
Post subject:	Latest list
Hey there! I've been reading the 4.0 list and I have a few questions: 1. Other than the warriors, what are the various formation sizes for things like Immortals, Pariah's, etc.? The list seems to infer one unit since other formation sizes are listed. Is that correct? 2. Why is the Tomb Spyder not a skimmer? Should it have Reinforced Armor? 3. Is there any reason not to take a Tomb? Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like a no brainer. 4. What was the reasoning behind limiting the Phalanx formations to a 16 count? 5. Why is a Phalanx limited to only 6 warrior units? 6. AEonic Orb: In the various flavors of Solar Flare, when the weapon fires does the "or" description mean: ? ? a) That the Solar Flare can fire as either one type or the other in any given turn ? ? b) Do you have to choose which flare type the AO carries and then that is the type of flare you shoot with for the entire 7. The only way to get a Supreme Commander is by taking a C'tan? I think that's it for now. Thanx in advance!

Author:	corey3750 [ Thu Dec 29, 2005 4:25 am ]
Post subject:	Latest list
good questions all. 1. Other than the warriors, what are the various formation sizes for things like Immortals, Pariah's, etc.? The list seems to infer one unit since other formation sizes are listed. Is that correct?

Immortals, Pariahs, and Wraiths are upgrades, and are therefore added to the formation for which they are bought. They don't get formations of their own.
2. Why is the Tomb Spyder not a skimmer? Should it have Reinforced Armor?
It should be a Skimmer. Their reinforced armor is there for a variety of reasons. But the basis of it is because of the conversion of it from it's 40k stats. Monstrous creatures are generally translated as either AV, or WE. Usually with RA. But it also has to do with justifying their high cost. The high cost is important in making them a tougher choice.
3. Is there any reason not to take a Tomb? Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like a no brainer.
If your scenario doesn't have objectives.
You don't have a spare 75 points.

It's the same for the Eldar really. If you have the points, it's a pretty important pick.
4. What was the reasoning behind limiting the Phalanx formations to a 16 count?
That's a hold over from when you could have REALLY big formations, and I just keep forgetting to delete it. You can't make a larger than 16 unit formation, so you can just ignore that. :blush:

5. Why is a Phalanx limited to only 6 warrior units?
I noticed that in 40k there is really very little difference between a basic marine, and a basic warrior. Just abilities, point cost and wargear. So, I decided that it would be easier to balance the list if the formation size and cost was fixed. I could use tactical marines as a baseline, and work from there.
6. AEonic Orb: In the various flavors of Solar Flare, when the weapon fires does the "or" description mean:

a) That the Solar Flare can fire as either one type or the other in any given turn
b) Do you have to choose which flare type the AO carries and then that is the type of flare you shoot with for the entire

It can fire in either mode in a given turn. Just like the Basalisk.
7. The only way to get a Supreme Commander is by taking a C'tan?

Correct.

It's about trade offs. If you take a Harvester Engine, you can't take a C'tan in a GT scenario. So you get a powerful unit, that is your most expensive formation (but also toughest), but you give up the option of having a Supreme Commander.

I've considered making a "superior" Tomb Lord. But I'll really need more test data.

I just played a game tonight, where that came into play. I'll write up a battle report as soon as I have a chance.

Author:	Honda [ Thu Dec 29, 2005 4:34 pm ]
Post subject:	Latest list
1. Other than the warriors, what are the various formation sizes for things like Immortals, Pariah's, etc.? The list seems to infer one unit since other formation sizes are listed. Is that correct? Immortals, Pariahs, and Wraiths are upgrades, and are therefore added to the formation for which they are bought. ?They don't get formations of their own.

I didn't ask my question correctly. I am aware that those units are upgrades and are not able to be in their own formation.

What I was trying to ask is, what is the size of the upgrade? 1 stand, 2 stands, etc.?

So if I should take the Immortals upgrade, how many stands of infantry will the Phalanx formation increase by?

Thanx!

Author:

corey3750 [ Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:07 pm ]

Post subject:

Latest list

Quote (Honda @ 29 Dec. 2005 (15:34))

ahhh, now I understand.

Well, the number listed next to them is how many stands you get.

you can buy:
0-3 Immortal stands, 40 points per stand
0-1 Pariah stands, 40 points
0-3 Wraith stands, 50 points per stand
0-3 Tomb Spyder "stands", 75 points per "stand"

so for example, you could buy 1 Immortal stand, for 40 points, 2 stands for 80 points, or 3 stands for 120 points. Or you could buy none.

Does that answer your question?

Author:	Honda [ Thu Dec 29, 2005 6:46 pm ]
Post subject:	Latest list
so for example, you could buy 1 Immortal stand, for 40 points, 2 stands for 80 points, or 3 stands for 120 points. ?Or you could buy none. Does that answer your question?

Perfectly. I guess I was used to seeing "upgrades" in other lists as being a fixed size. In your list, the upgrades can be "sized", for lack of a better term.

I'm intrigued by this list for some reason and am seriously considering modeling the AO, Monoliths, and Tomb. Given that everthing is just about scratch built, that makes it a pretty cheap army ($$-wise) to put together.

Hmm...plus one of our local Epic players is a big 40K Necron fan.

Between the two of us, we might be able to put together a fairly large force.

Ok, thanx for the info and "We'll be back!"

Author:	corey3750 [ Thu Dec 29, 2005 8:22 pm ]
Post subject:	Latest list
I wanted the upgrades to be the way you tailored your formations to suit what you want them to do. glad you like it.

Author:	bans [ Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:52 pm ]
Post subject:	Latest list
hello I'm writing a necron list to Netepic and I want to use the special rules that you write in your army list for armageddon. Can I use it in my document?? If you accept who write and where I found this rules and where the people can dowload it will be added to the document. thanks a lot for your help. regards Bans

Author:	Honda [ Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:05 pm ]
Post subject:	Latest list
I wanted the upgrades to be the way you tailored your formations to suit what you want them to do.

Oops! One more quick question. Is there a reason that warriors are not one of the upgrade options?

I seem to remember from the Necron Codex that they can take up to...is it 20 warriors in a 40K phalanx.

I may not be correct on that, but I thought I saw most of the local Necron players fielding fairly large phalanxes. Also, it would be a way to cheapen the cost of the phalanx if you wanted "bulk" and staying power.

Thanx!

Author:	corey3750 [ Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:33 pm ]
Post subject:	Latest list
well, if you consider that there are 5 warriors to a stand, the 6 stands you can get represent 29 warrior and a Lord.

Author:	Honda [ Fri Dec 30, 2005 2:01 pm ]
Post subject:	Latest list
well, if you consider that there are 5 warriors to a stand, the 6 stands you can get represent 29 warrior and a Lord.

So by that statement are you attempting to represent one epic infantry figure to one 40K figure?

I haven't seen that as practice in other list. If so, what are your thoughts behind that?

Author:	corey3750 [ Fri Dec 30, 2005 3:08 pm ]
Post subject:	Latest list
well, I relate that way because it's the way that makes the most sense. one tank miniature represents one tank, so why shouldn't one infantry figure represent one figure from 40k?

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/