+1

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

If they are added in but you don't like the modern DA aircraft then just don't take them in your army lists? I run my SM armies without any aircraft half the time and do fine with around 3 attached Hunters.

I don't think adding the option hurts the list or buffs it to previously unheard-of levels, as they're a Dark Angels only unt, they only real option to include them is the dark angels list, as I doubt very much (or actually hope not) that lists for the dark angels successor chapters are likely to be developed....

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

Just two points on that, which were already made but perhaps not clear:

1) If the lists are written with the aircraft in, they'll be balanced with them included, raising the issue of imbalance without them if they're not on the weaker side of balanced.

2) If the lists are okay without aircraft, as you've stated, why have people complained about a lack of aircover and why do we go through any of this trouble to include any new aircraft at all? Are we absolutely sure it's not just because we want the latest toy in the arms race?

I have to say that this doesn't make sense to me. Ask a dozen marine players about their lists. I highly doubt they will say it's unbalanced because they do or don't field TBs.

This single aircraft entry is not going to effect the fluffiness of the list when you have numerous DA specific unit types already. What it provides is part of the metagame that is air "power" and many folks like to have that available. Hamstringing players often puts people off using a list - something I think we need to avoid with a fledgling list if we can. Let's not be bogged down in a long discussion about one minor issue within the list (yes I understand your dislike of the option).

It may now just be time to accept that other people (over 75% the last time I checked the poll) would like to see the aircraft in the DA list.

I don't think it's appropriate to suggest I'm still intent on arguing that they shouldn't be included, I even stated as much - the poll needs to just run and then something be done based on that. However I still think it necessary for people to explore why they want them, and to be honest about it. The reasons I've seen people putting forward have been less about "the list isn't playable" and far too much about "the list isn't playable the way I want", which doesn't seem a very suitable motive for as dramatic a change as introducing whole new units of a previously completely unavailable sort and entirely, absolutely changing the list's usage.

it's not a dramatic change though.... the list is developmental, that doesn't preclude the addition or removal of formations, it's less likely of course, but we're not talking about adding a new formation to an established, approved list, we're talking about adding a flyer to a marine list.... there is plenty of testing with other flyers to show this isn't going to ruin anything or produce unbeatable combinations

the lists aren't so finely balanced that the addition of a formation should screw things up.... we're not talking about adding basilisks to the imperial fists here or giving steel legion thunderhawks

I'd be right with you if someone wanted to add the stormtalon to the established, approved codex list, but this is a different situation

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

You seem to be coming from a position that the only valid reason for changes is if there is a problem in how the list plays. But that is just your own opinion. It's perfectly acceptable if people want units purely for fluff reasons, or even because they just don't like the feel of the list ("it doesn't play the way I want it to"). That's up to them, it doesn't mean it will automatically happen but it doesn't mean they are automatically wrong because you happen not to think their reasons are "suitable motives". If enough people agree then the AC can take that into account and balance it against the bigger picture (e.g. whether it is a major change given the status of the list, the strength of feeling in the community, etc).

In this particular case, I myself don't think it's a dramatic change at all, provided it be done sensibly. That is why I have been making the case for restraint in the stats, i.e. keeping it very similar to the Thunderbolt, a unit which we already know works fine in the marine list at a specific price point. In general, people are quite capable of considering the pros and cons of including a unit in their own opinions of whether they support it or not.

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

_________________
My NetEA Lists:
Fir Iolarion Titan Clan List
Dark Angels List

Always looking to Trade!
Angel's Trade Thread

AoC, let's not be dramatic about the fighter unit. It's just an aircraft formation. It doesn't win games off its own bat. The DA use it so it is fluffy. In any event, it's not going to turn the list to poo if you add it in. But it's your call. Just recognise 20+ people polled said yes to it

The most recent DA 40K fluff has them, but don't disregard all that came before it. To suggest it's not at least slightly contentious is highly disingenuous. That the list warrants it, needs it, or otherwise gains value by including them seem to be the points that should be considered and discussed first and foremost, at least that's what will create the least argument and the best, most usable list.

I'm not disregarding anything. You like old DA fluff(hey me too!), that's fair, but please recognise others aren't as concerned by it as you when it comes to the nuances of the current Epic:A meta-game which is more important than old GW canon. Some allowances need to be made when writing lists.


I'm not suggesting it's not contentious (please don't put words in my mouth or call me names thanks), however, I just don't think this issue is the "great evil" you seem to be making it out to be. A majority of interested parties would like to see it in the list and as Kyrt has already mentioned:




And we are discussing those points above, and most discussion seems to agree that it is warranted, is needed and gains value from it. What will create the least argument is getting onboard with it when the majority seem to want it, and yes, even if you don't like it.

What I'd prefer not to see is the list being held up by a minority view of avoiding its trial in a list based on a dislike for whether GW has been jumping the shark for the last 10 years. I say this because it seems (to me at least) the majority of your argument/view is largely based on this:


Which is valid ... to a degree. However, we need to move on at some point and I'd rather not see another thread with 15 pages of discussion about the negatives of a single unit type when it hasn't even been proven to break a list (knowing full well that similar units in other lists have not done so) - how can it when it's not yet in the list? That requires testing and currently we are at a testing phase for the list, so the inclusion of this unit is still a valid option whether some like it or not.

I'm sorry if this seems harsh, but I need to guide discussion and I prefer not to debate endlessly. What I've learned of late (being guilty of this myself) is people need to back the AC, by giving them the benefit of the doubt and not try to corral them. Make your point succinctly and move on (play or not) if your view is not the chosen path.

I think, Dobbsy, that we shall have to agree to disagree on all points and call it at that.

It looks like the majority favour the addition of the flier(s). I will would like to test the list including the fliers in 2 weeks. Hoping we can agree on a general point total and such for the short term so that testing can weed out what changes need to be made. I'd like to do a Dual wing force with air support rather than hunters for AA.

_________________
Necron AC (click to see current Necron list threads)
Toronto Wargaming Group

To offer a different opinion I really like the Dark Angels flyers myself. The models look good - a lot better than the Stormraven or Stormtalon certainly and the gothic detail and winged angels fits with the Dark Angels well. The DAs have always been distinctly focussed on hunting the fallen as the core of their background and the Dark Talon fits in well with this, having a holding cell to transport a captured fallen member back to the rock. Being the first legion. the background is that they inherited some last remnants of arcane knowledge and technology not available to later legions, so having distinctive arcane weapons on the Dark Talon also fits well with other DA background.