I missed the Terminators in the list were Assault Terminators. You've done Assault Terminators very badly wrong however! Assault Terminator squads have absolutely no ranged or heavy weapon options – they have never been able to take any at all, just Thunder Hammers and Storm Shidels or twin Lightning Claws.
There have been epic Assault Terminator stats for many years now that should be used. They're as Terminators except for CC2+, an invulnerable save and no FF or shooting attack of any kind. They should cost 350 as the extra damage and save makes up for the lack shooting.
Other errors: Your stats for the Thunderfire Cannon (the unit and the one on the Achilles) are wrong also – it should have 2 x shots. A Land Raider Crusader has CC5+ (higher than a regular Land Raider due to it's frag assault launchers). Assault Marines shouldn't have FF 3+. Your reference sheet innacurately refers to a Vulcan Dreadnought. A Vulcan Dreadnought is the sort with the Multi-Melta found in the Salamanders list. There may have been a name given to the assault cannon power fist dread but I'm not sure what it was.
The FF on the Achiles looks borked and unrepresentatively too low too – the tank has 4 x Multi-Melta and a Thunderfire for cruks sake it deserves better than a FF5+ MW. If a Land Speeder's sole weapon of 1 x Multi-Melta gives it a FF 5+ MW attack then the Achiles should IMO have a FF 3+ MW (no extra attacks). Yes, that's a powerful tank at close range, but it's meant to be and I would cost it at 125 to pay for it.
kyussinchains wrote:
regarding centurions, I'm not opposed to adding them in, but can't see what they really bring to the list, I took the siege dread out as having a slow assault formation which can't be transported easily is a duff option IMO, then if you give them teleport or similar you step on the toes of the terminators somewhat.
I miss the Siege Dreadnought and think definitely should be in there in place of the regular dreadnought in the list. I find your opinion of it odd, as I think it's pretty good myself. Having FF3+ and two flame weapons – 15cm AP3+ ignore cover and 15cm AP4+ ignore cover - is a nice weapon but pretty powerful against infantry in cover. They're best either deployed from Thunderhawks/Storm Ravens or Drop Podded down, but I'd take them over other Dreadnoughts.
Centurions don't teleport at all. I don't see them as seperate formations, they normally seem to be seen in smaller numbers supporting regular marines. I wouldn't have Centurions be a seperate formation but have 0-2 (either or both types) being an upgrade option to Tactical or Devestator detachments.
If we're going to discuss them it would help to have some stats so I've translated those from 40k:
Devestator Centurions Infantry 15cm 4+ 6+ 5+ Reinforced Armour
2 x Twin Linked Heavy Bolter 30cm AP4+
1 x Twin Linked Lascannon 45cm AT4+
3 x Hurricane Bolters +1 Attack Small Arms
(may be transported by Drop Pod, Land Raider or Thunderhawk, taking up 2 spaces)
Upgrade cost 75 points each??
Devestator Centurions would be very tough with 4+ Reinforced armour and very well armed with 3 TL shots each. They're very deadly in FF too – as well as the FF from their heavy weapons each Devestator Centurion has a chest mounted Hurricane Bolter array (the same weapon system as on a Land Raider Crusader which adds an extra attack in epic) so each stand would 4 FF dice hitting of 5s or 1.333 hits per stand.
Assault Centurions Infantry 15cm 4+ 3+ 4+ Reinforced Armour
Siege Drills +1 Extra Attack, MW
Twin-linked Flamers 15cm AP4+ ignore cover AND small arms ignore cover
(may be transported by Drop Pod, Land Raider or Thunderhawk, taking up 2 spaces)
Upgrade cost 75 points each??
That sounds like it could add plenty different to the list to me. The shooting or It's shooting is powerful and could encourage a forward firebase of a garissoned upgraded Tac./Dev. and gives the list a large, powerful infantry based formation that is different from anything in the codex astartes list.
kyussinchains wrote:
GlynG, I hadn't read the 40k book, so thanks for the info, I think something less complicated may be a better starting point to represent the tenacity of the fists, having a built-in leader function which removes an extra blast marker when regrouping was something I had considered, I don't like the direction they've taken in that the fists fight on when they should withdraw and sometimes throw their lives away.... I know they've done it on occasion, but not particularly keen on making it a rule unless there is a consensus
If you're going to champion the list you really need to read the 40k codexes for them to have an understanding of how GW represent them. We now have much more background and detail on the IF than ever before. I'll email you through a link and you can read it.
You might not like but stubborn and tactically refusing to retreat is a distinctive feature of the Imperial Fists and it should be represented in the rules. I dislike free leaders because it is a purely beneficial for them and it is made clear that the stubbornness causes them to stay in doomed fights and loose a lot more lives than other chapters might.
In the background the stubbornness it's kind of an inherent inherited character trait. The Imperial Fists are aware of it and the wiser and higher up of them try to control it fight it in themselves. Captain Lysander gets grilled and demoted by a council of his fellow captains for refusing two other space marines chapters to aid them in a battle where they are loosing, because he's too stubborn to admit they were loosing.
Are we necessarily going in the right direction by not allowing Imperial Fists Thunderhawk Gunships? They use them a lot in the various battles in the Imperial Fists 40k Codex – in one of the battles in the background a single company (i.e. less than a normal 3k epic army) goes to war with orks and uses 4 Thunderhawks to deploy. The epic list needs some downsides compared to the Codex Astartes list but I'd be more inclined to include Thunderhawks but cost them at 250 points (like they are in the Red Corsairs list). Or make Thunderhawks 0-1 per 3,000 points.
Sorry for the long post, lots to comment on and I might as well throw it all in there now and go off and do something different.
