I can't think of much else to do, plus I have started to win with it (always a bad thing). So new pairs of eyes are needed. So if all you Marine fans out there can get a game or two in, destruction testing the beast, that would be great. If I do play again with them on Tuesday it will be most likely to try out the redemer/assault marine combo, excessive air assaults and whatever else 'extreme' stuff I can think of. Hell if I am lucky my opponent would use them!

BL as well if you could get a series of games in that would be wonderful, being the most 40k and backgrounded person here (essentially do they behave in a way that shows Salamander traits?).

The last post of the old mega thread I will repeat below.


Well I think any further testing by me isn't helpful as I've exhausted my styles of using marines and possible list configs (and have steadily improved both style and list so now getting minor victories). Others now need to have a go! Has it gone to far and is now overpowered? Does it meet the original design goals?

I'll start a new thread with the current list I've been using. Once a few others try it and its hopefully not abusable I guess we would move into pretty post production and try and make a nice looking book. To that end we may want to bother this chap.
And of course I can't find the link. Anyone rember the guy who did a beautiful codex for his chapter?

Otherwise I'm out of ideas. Reviewing old comments I hope I have addressed the various problems, mainly with the support tweaks. Certainly the last two games have been victories which is unusual, and against new opponents.

Other ideas that weren't implemented were IC whirlwinds. A good idea however the points for whirlwinds would have to go up, and here a key problem is activation count. So I reckon this actually wouldn't help much. Unless perhaps they became a formation of 3 for 250/275.

The only other thing I'm considering but would need someone to try out is the vindicator formation being 4 vindies and/or incinerators. My worry here is they would be too good a Landing Craft load. Or be too Skorcha like roaring off and jumping infantry in cover 75 cm's away with 8 5+AP attacks making vindies somewhat obsolete. Thoughts? If not they can happily go on (with the downside I can only find two pred incierators in my collection, but a couple of preds with no sponsons - where did the heavy flamers go?).

At this late stage and having dropped it in testing ages back (maybe I did try it with a landing craft) I'm thinking it shouldn't go in.


Editted to reflect peoples fears and desires!

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Bigger doc with varient units included.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Looking good but hadn't a game with this new list yet.

Nut yes the Epic Salamandersbehave as Salamanders should
They are stubborn and never give quarter AND favour bigger formations who slwows them down which is both represented by the well...bigger formations

And they are a nightmare in FF with alle the IC and MW attacks.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

We have a 4000 point game scheduled for Sunday - infantry heavy, with phased in reinforcements.  That should be a pretty challenging game for this list with the relatively shorter range on the various units (requiring more movement to reach effective attack range).  I'm struggling to picture how this will work without substantial fast attack (from the list) or air assaults (from the scenario).  I may die fast and quiet.

Also, it's a round-robin event, so I should get in games against 3 other armies for a broad spectrum.

I'm thinking I'll actually try Termies in LRs.  What do you want tested for the Land Raiders?  Should I use the "Salamander Land Raider" units or Redeemers with the Termies?

Assuming I'm reading the list correctly, they get a fixed number of Rhinos and can buy additional transports from the "Close Support" section.  Is that correct?  If so, I see a lot of "+ Redeemer" formations for the RA save and the extra transport capacity.


As far as testing, how much has been tried with the "marine horde" approach?  I won't be able to do it in this game, but it seems interesting.  It would also be good information for any future Space Wolves development.

Also, what about Helios formations?  I'd love to give those a try with a very "in your face" approach.  They're just not going to fit the scenario very well.

_________________
Neal

I've been using a tactical formation and a devastator formation as the core.
Tacticals + salamander tacticals + land raider + SC 535
Devestators + sally devs + hunter + land raider + Librarian 560 bts

I find the SC is essential with so few activations and each roll being critical.

Not too impressed with the redeemer, its gunned up as much as possible and costed as low as possible but still has failed to set the world afire. The regular raider seems a better bet. Still have to try 2 with an assault formation though. With the incinerators works ok for a 300 point formation. Remains to be seen if the extra stuff is worth 350. Hell maybe I'm wrong and they would have to become 85 each!

I'm thinking I'll actually try Termies in LRs.  What do you want tested for the Land Raiders?  Should I use the "Salamander Land Raider" units or Redeemers with the Termies?

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Adding one Land Raider Helios to the Land Raider Detachment was always a no-brainer for me. It turns the 30cm AP4+ Twin Heavy Bolter into a 45cm AP6+/AT6+ Attack with 2-3 shots (average number of units under the template) with optional IndirectFire (rarely used).

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Tis 475 in the army and I've never been able to justify it points wise at 3000. Better to have a formation of whirlwinds and a formation of something else as the activation counts tend towards the low end of things.

_________________
Neal

Ah, there isn't actually an option of adding Helios to most formations. Only Terminators and  Land Raiders in fact can have them. This was because I think we decided early on it was too tricky to add whirlwinds as support so helios would be even harder. Plus I think this is an option in the scions list?

If you think its too restrictive (a few comments from players have said it a very restrictive list with all the fun removed) do say. Two things you've assumed so far is that any formation can have the helios upgrade and that the terminators can mount in redeemers instead/as well as the regular raiders. Are both things fairly harmless to allow?

The assault chaps can work quite well I've found, especially because its the marines who die first in combat, so it keeps its firepower for longer.

Hopefully said scenario will help you get the redeemers in range

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

All the land raiders are with a multi melta and as a resut the formation costs more than a regular land raider one? I though it was 375 for 4 or 85 each to add. If the question is why does it cost the same to add one of these to a formation as it would in another army to add a normal land raider its because salamander formations don't have the option to add an ablative razorback, vindicators and hunter like regular marines do. They get more infantry and transports but less tanks. It is in some ways somewhat harder to balance - at least the regular marine list can do cheap mech formations that retain their speed. The poor sallies get 5cm move knocked off. And iit used to be just the upgrade had the MM, but modeling that is too much hassle so all their land raiders have it as standard and the points went up as a result.
I haven't noticed a problem with them, though if anyone else does they can go to FF5+.

I have same worry about the Dread. I don't see any reason to take normal Assault Dread (Fist + Assault C) over this. Perhaps drop FF to 5+ to balance multi melta?

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

I'll give the following a go. I'll see if FF2/3+ makes any difference (can do their assaults on the averages?)

300 Tac (BTS and SC )
075 SC
075 Red
075 Hunter

250 Dev
150 Red
050 Chap
250 Dev
150 Red
050 Chap
425 LC

250 Dev
150 Red

250 Warhound
200 Attack Bikes
150 Thunderbolts
150 Thunderbolts

That bad enough Hena? Probably play against marines or guard. Maybe Orks with a great gargant (if so, should I attack? ).

Personally I don't reckon the above is too hot. I would rather extra marines instead of a redeemer reliance. Say the LC - with extra devs I get 4 more stands of infantry and 6 rhinos for 100 points less cost (and 2MW and 1 normal hit vs 3 1/3 MW hits at 2+ or 2 2/3 MW at 3+).

Also somewhat light on AA cover. Any way of improving it?

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

I don't think and haven't found so in games. Advantages - heavier armour, guns, transport - disadvantages cost, speed (both of which are fairly important in an assault army).
Normal marines ge to add a lot more armour to formations and have a higher activation count as well as fast attack options to supplement them. Salamanders get viable mechanised formations and nothing else. The formations aren't taken in isolation but as a whole army working together. Remember the marine mechanised army is not exactly a great choice curently. And even with heavy use of these boosts their performance is still less than steller.

I obviously dissagree with the dred. The assault dred is 99.9% used by airborn assault formations. Here that costs 50 points more. You can't take it in isolation. FF5+ MW just wasn't worth it in comparison to other options, especially when you already pay a preium to air assault it.

And again the attack bike. I still fell its inferior to a land speeder. Actually I'm glad someone dissagres as they are supposed to be balanced. To me the ability to garrison forward, or around a key formation on overwatch more than makes up for 5+FF. I can with speeders teleport in terminators turn 1, then double my forward pseeders up to support, laying a bm and then supporting. Can't do that with bikes. Bikes are a better choice to support slower formations that start in your deployment zone, but its a further bite into your support allocation then to get regular scouts as no army now can really afford to be without them.

Note that the SC on one Dev would make that to be the BTS. That one would be deployed on ground. I'm not too sure it's light on AA. 2 sets of Tbolts and Hunter is pretty good in my books. I don't consider LC to be risky with air assault. It's tough enough to weather fire unless you get the crit.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x