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

'All Arms' Marine list
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=73&t=15712		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Fri May 29, 2009 4:14 pm ]
Post subject:  'All Arms' Marine list
Here's my thoughts on how to fix the dirtside Marine list without bothering the airborne list points costs unduly.


The changes are similar to the EpicUK tournament groups' changes, but as well as fixing the balance of the airborne army list style they also have a go at balancing the ground-based army list style.
Author:  Chroma [ Fri May 29, 2009 4:18 pm ]
Post subject:  'All Arms' Marine list
Looks good!
Author:  nealhunt [ Fri May 29, 2009 4:37 pm ]
Post subject:  'All Arms' Marine list
Moved from the other thead...

Not that this has anything to do with Nids v Marines at this point, but I fail to see what the infantry reduction/aircraft increase will accomplish.  I have a problem with the entire concept precisely because I don't think it will do anything.

The fact is that despite the arguments to the contrary, most SM lists don't take huge amounts of air assaults and do take 1-3 ground formations of Tacs, Devs or Scouts.  I just went and pulled some batreps for example armies to see what would happen to their point cost if no force changes were implemented.

This one with 2 Thawks would be the same.

This one with an LC would be 100 points cheaper.

This one with 1 Thawk would be 25 points cheaper.

This one with 1 Thawk would be 50 points cheaper.

This one with 2 Thawks would have come out the same.

My typical marine force with a reasonable deepstrike component of 1 Thawk and 1 Termie formation would be 50-75 points cheaper from 2-3 Tac/Dev formations.

(there were a couple others that I didn't include because they were odd scenario games)

So, you're giving the SM players ~50 point average discount even if they make absolutely no changes to their army composition.  I admit that's not huge, but it still begs the question of why they deserve a discount.  On the flip side, none of them would have gained more than 100 points even if they removed all air assault from their army.

"Gee... I get 50 points for doing nothing, or I can scrap all my air assault, trade it for ground pounders and save maybe 150..."

Where is the incentive in that?  How is that going to be enough to encourage marine players to make substantial changes to their force composition?

50-100 points for removing a major strategic component of the army... um... no.
Author:  GlynG [ Fri May 29, 2009 4:42 pm ]
Post subject:  'All Arms' Marine list
Good call, thanks for this! :agree:

If my opponents are ok with it and the situation warrant I may see if I can use standardly this instead of the normal list, and will mention it to my mate who stopped playing epic when I try and talk him into playing again :smile:
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Fri May 29, 2009 4:43 pm ]
Post subject:  'All Arms' Marine list
Neal, I ran the numbers on the last-linked one (two Thunderhawks) as compared to this list's costs and it came out 50pts more expensive... possibly the others are off too?


The intent isn't to dramatically change the army list style, just give a fully ground-based army list some extra points to add some extra upgrades to give their ground formations a bit more punch. I figure that's better than doing nothing at all.


Plus I've sneaked one or two other changes in there (like 50pt Vindicators, discounted Land Raiders) to again incentivise the taking of punchy ground-based formations which currently are lame ducks.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Fri May 29, 2009 5:05 pm ]
Post subject:  'All Arms' Marine list
Where is the incentive in that?  How is that going to be enough to encourage marine players to make substantial changes to their force composition?

The incentive is in making a fully dirtside list.


For example here's an army list that comes to 3000pts under this proposal:


Assault Detachment

Devastator Detachment (Garrison)
- 2x Dreadnought Upgrade

Tactical Detachment
- Hunter Upgrade

Tactical Detachment
- Hunter Upgrade

Land Raider Detachment

Predator Detachment

Vindicator Detachment

Whirlwind Detachemnt
- Hunter Upgrade

Terminator Detachment
- Chaplain Upgrade

Warhound Titan

'All Arms' cost - 3000pts
Official cost - 3275pts
ERC cost - 3250pts
EpicUK cost - 3200pts



So when you build a specifically ground-pounding army list, you're saving much more than 50-100pts in exchange for giving up your air assaults. Enough to buy a whole extra formation, or quite a few upgrades.

Note that I used several things that got more expensive there as well as cheaper (Warhound, Terminators).


So an airborne list should stay pretty much the same cost, a semi-airborne list might save 50pts, whilst a full dirtside list should save 200-300pts.
Author:  Chroma [ Fri May 29, 2009 5:16 pm ]
Post subject:  'All Arms' Marine list
Quote: (Evil and Chaos @ 29 May 2009, 17:05 )

So an airborne list should stay pretty much the same cost, a semi-airborne list might save 50pts, whilst a full dirtside list should save 200-300pts.

This is precisely what I like about this idea.
Author:  Dangersaurus [ Fri May 29, 2009 5:16 pm ]
Post subject:  'All Arms' Marine list
I like the look of this, although I'm afraid to use this and then feel like the win came from points fiddling. The more conservative early suggestions might make a better starting point.

Also, are the stats of marine units set in stone? This is sort of a throwback to 2nd edition 40k, but what if instead of a points break Tacs on Sustained Fire orders could get an extra shot or a reroll? Is that too defensive for the Marine style of war?
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Fri May 29, 2009 5:22 pm ]
Post subject:  'All Arms' Marine list
Quote: (Dangersaurus @ 29 May 2009, 17:16 )

Also, are the stats of marine units set in stone? This is sort of a throwback to 2nd edition 40k, but what if instead of a points break Tacs on Sustained Fire orders could get an extra shot or a reroll? Is that too defensive for the Marine style of war?

No extra Special Rules please, this is 4th edition. :)

I like the look of this, although I'm afraid to use this and then feel like the win came from points fiddling. The more conservative early suggestions might make a better starting point.

Well, it's pretty commonly accepted that the Marine Tanks are sub-par too, which is why I included the price drops for them too.

The Vindicator for example under the current ERC recommendations recieves 3 seperate stat increases IIRC, plus a points drop. I just went for a larger points drop.
Author:  Morgan Vening [ Fri May 29, 2009 6:03 pm ]
Post subject:  'All Arms' Marine list
Quote: (Evil and Chaos @ 29 May 2009, 17:22 )

Well, it's pretty commonly accepted that the Marine Tanks are sub-par too, which is why I included the price drops for them too.

The Vindicator for example under the current ERC recommendations recieves 3 seperate stat increases IIRC, plus a points drop. I just went for a larger points drop.

OK, so these are the vanilla AP3/AT4 IgCov Vindicators? Not the +5cm MW ones? This should be stated explicitly then. Just so there's no confusion.

The only problem I have (and I really like these changes), is the price paid for ThunderHawks and Landing Craft. A recent list I was working on had 4 Tactical Squads in ThunderHawks. So it's now 200pts more expensive to field.

Couldn't a different approach be taken? Keep the TH and LC at it's standard cost, and add an "Airborne" upgrade for 25pts? This would keep your points the same as seemingly intended, but not penalize people who want to take less than full TH/LC's.

Morgan Vening
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Fri May 29, 2009 6:07 pm ]
Post subject:  'All Arms' Marine list
OK, so these are the vanilla AP3/AT4 IgCov Vindicators? Not the +5cm MW ones? This should be stated explicitly then. Just so there's no confusion.
Well pretty much everyone has abandoned the 'handbook' stats by now as Jervis rejected it, it shouldn't really need explanation.

But just to be clear, all stats are as the official stats unless otherwise stated.

The only problem I have (and I really like these changes), is the price paid for ThunderHawks and Landing Craft. A recent list I was working on had 4 Tactical Squads in ThunderHawks. So it's now 200pts more expensive to field.

That'd be 100pts more expensive (+200pts, -100pts)... and to be honest is a poor use of Thunderhawks unless you're also putting a Dreadnought alongside the Tacticals (and then magically the list costs exactly the same as it did before anyway!).

Tacticals have never really been a staple of competative Thunderhawk assaults, although with the cheaper dreadnought this list at least raises the possibility.

Couldn't a different approach be taken? Keep the TH and LC at it's standard cost, and add an "Airborne" upgrade for 25pts? This would keep your points the same as seemingly intended, but not penalize people who want to take less than full TH/LC's.

Not really, as you don't specify which formations are being transported in your Thunderhawks as part of your army list.
Author:  nealhunt [ Fri May 29, 2009 7:33 pm ]
Post subject:  'All Arms' Marine list
Quote: (Evil and Chaos @ 29 May 2009, 16:43 )

Neal, I ran the numbers on the last-linked one (two Thunderhawks) as compared to this list's costs and it came out 50pts more expensive... possibly the others are off too?

I ran them from the other thread's general concept discussion, not from your specific list.  I think the difference is because I assumed Scouts were in the "all infantry -25" category.

'All Arms' cost - 3000pts
ERC cost - 3250pts
...
So an airborne list should stay pretty much the same cost, a semi-airborne list might save 50pts, whilst a full dirtside list should save 200-300pts.

This is not accurate.

75 points of savings has absolutely nothing to do with the infantry/air changes and instead comes from the Vindicator formation change.  That's included in your projected air-to-ground savings with that.  However, an air assault list can get that discount as well by including Vindicators in the force, either in the ground component or in a Landing Craft.  That shouldn't count towards the assumed dirtside savings.  The savings on units that cannot be integrated into a semi-air list is more in the 125-175 range.  Take out the 25-50 points a semi-air list will also save and you're down to ~125 points of savings.

That's not insubstantial, but I still don't consider it a great incentive to switch.

Importantly, the big savings aren't limited to just mud marines, if you're inclined to use Vindicators and Dreads (the biggest discounts) in a Landing Craft an LC list actually gets much cheaper.  A 2 Dev, 4 Dread, Vindi air group is a good mix of ranged fire and FF ability, allowing some tactical flexibility.  Under your list it would drop 200 points.  So, that's a full-on air assault list that easily keeps pace with your intended ground pounder discount.


Then look at the effect on Drop Pod armies.  Since Devs + 2 dreads is superior in almost every way to 6 Tacs and costs the same, you effectively remove all Tacticals from drop pods.  I assume that's not a desired result.  Adding Dreads might reduce the number of formations and therefore Deathwinds, but they pack a lot of power into a cheap package to offset that.  4 Dev formations and 4 Dreads (mixed however you like) in a Strike Cruiser packs 4 Deathwinds and is still 125 points under price.  Add in 25-50 points cheaper for the ground elements and once again, savings are almost comparable to an all ground-pounder force.  It's a bit less savings, but you end up with superior units as well.

No disincentive for drop pod forces, except for Tacs.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Fri May 29, 2009 7:51 pm ]
Post subject:  'All Arms' Marine list
75 points of savings has absolutely nothing to do with the infantry/air changes and instead comes from the Vindicator formation change.  That's included in your projected air-to-ground savings with that.
Well it's included in the 'All Arms' list cost savings I'll give you that... but Vindicators are worthless as a formation under either ERC or EpicUK costs so I thought I'd try this.

However, an air assault list can get that discount as well by including Vindicators in the force, either in the ground component or in a Landing Craft.
It certainly could.

Importantly, the big savings aren't limited to just mud marines, if you're inclined to use Vindicators and Dreads (the biggest discounts) in a Landing Craft an LC list actually gets much cheaper.
I don't think there's any proble with that, particularly with the Vindicators as they're barely attractive as a formation even at 200pts.

For the Dreadnoughts, I was thinking of having the upgrade as '50pts for 1, 75pts for 2', which would seem to mitigate some of the points you raise below too.

A 2 Dev, 4 Dread, Vindi air group is a good mix of ranged fire and FF ability, allowing some tactical flexibility.  Under your list it would drop 200 points.  So, that's a full-on air assault list that easily keeps pace with your intended ground pounder discount.
Notably it's an air drop group that would be literally rubbish under the Official, ERC or EpicUK points costs.

That air group you post is *not* worth 1350/1300pts as it has 275pts of Vindicators & 200pts of Dreadnoughts (simply wasted points IMHO), but that's what the Official/ERC list would charge you.

So, under this proposal, a previously rubbish choice starts to look attractive?


Then look at the effect on Drop Pod armies.  Since Devs + 2 dreads is superior in almost every way to 6 Tacs and costs the same, you effectively remove all Tacticals from drop pods.  I assume that's not a desired result.
Certainly not.
Having Dreadnoughts with the 50/75pt costing I mentioned above might mitigate this Dreadnought spamming but still provide a discount for taking this sub-par unit?
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/