I've taken longer to write up the documents than I'd intended sorry, but I'm attaching a new version of the Black Templars army list having taken on championing them (previous discussion of changes I had in mind here for reference).

Version 4.0 changes (compared to Pulsar's version 3.5 from 2009):
2012 SM updates incorporated
Storm Talon SM fighter aircraft added
Hunter upgrade consequently reduced from 0-2 to 0-1
Hellfire (shooty) configuration Dreadnought removed
Attack Bike upgrade limited to 0-1 per bike formation
Mandatory Emperor's Champion included in Commander upgrade
Emperor's Champion can be added to a Tactical or Sword Brethren unit only (Terminators no longer)
Vindicator formation added (previous list had an odd combined Predator and Vindicator formation instead)
Thunderhawk Transporter altered – 4+ Reinforced, only shooting is 2 x 15cm AA, FF down to 6+

Additional differences from Compendium BT list (transcription errors in the Compendium list compared to the previous 3.5 BT list document):
Librarians should not be in the list
The Emperor's Champion should have had Fearless
BT Landing Craft is identical but more expensive, costing 375

I haven't had a chance to play the list yet, though I hope to get some games in in the coming months. Please let me know what you think, any errors you spot and any details of games played using the list (I'm particularly interested in peoples experiences using the Stormtalons and revised Thunderhawk Transporters).

Is that really the correct Storm talon statline? they look substantially worse than Thunderbolts (not that I mind, Storm talons are literally half the size of a Thunderbolt and butt-ugly to boot).

Surely that Storm Talon is a typo. No armor? They're as tough as Valks and they've got 5+..

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

that was part of what made me double take (their weapons are fairly shitty as well). They are fighters though, rather than Thunderbolt fighter-bombers, so would have a marginally easier time positioning themselves for intercept or ground attack. Also, the 1+ init is always good .

Yeah i was worried about them in the IH but they work well in intercept-land. I'm sure the armor bit isn't intended.
I like the transporter having defensive AA only, not as thrilled by 6+FF. However excited to see this list play!

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

I am personally in favour of the following stats for Strom Talons:

Storm Talon - AV
Move 35 cm
Armour: 5+/ CC 6+/ FF4+
Twin Assault cannons 30 cm AP4+/AT4+
Skyhammer Missile Launcher: 45 cm AP5+/AT5+/AA5+
Notes: Skimmer, Planetfall
Detachment of 4 Storm Talons for 250/275

With the above stats, it fulfills its two fluff assigned battlefield roles which are assault support and AA cover, they also fulfill a great void in the SM list, offering decent ground based AA cover, while not touching the Hunter's role as Thunderhawk support.

_________________
"War is not about who is right, but about who is left". - B. Russell

Thanks for spotting that! The Storm Talon armour was indeed a typo, they should have 5+. I took the stats from the previous disscusion of them here. I've re-uploaded a corrected version.

Storm Talons have the same offensive AA capability as a Thunderbolt, though with 15cm range for both. They have better armour and superior firepower against all AP or AT target formations, though a bit worse against mixed. They activate on a 1+ though, so are more reliable and this alone is probably worth 25 points extra on top of SM Thunderbolts in the CA list.

FF6+ on the TH Transporter is intentionally low to focus their role on transporting and to discourage empty ones being used as air assaulters. A 350 point formation of 3 has 6 DC 4+ Reinforced (2 more than the same Landing Craft) so they need to have that disadvantage so they can be kept at that.

I'm against making the ST a skimmer, it's meant to be the SM fighter aircraft and as a fighter in the game it can act as described in the background - go primarily for enemy aircraft then take once their gone take on ground formations. As a skimmer it would be too slow and could only protect part of the battlefield not the whole army.

It is stated in the fluff that Storm talons in White Scars and Raven Guard armies spearhead assaults.

How does a fighter accomplish that, exactly?

Besides, helicopters are Skimmers in Epic, not aircraft. All low atmosphere flyers are skimmers for that matter.

I am a little surprised at the insistence on making the storm talon something it is not.

_________________
"War is not about who is right, but about who is left". - B. Russell

To kind of turn your question on its head a little, how would aircraft alpha-striking artillery formations or loading up blast markers on key targets to hinder activations ahead of an army's advance/tactical drop not be spearheading an assault? I mean, that's usually what my aircraft are doing in turn one...

_________________
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/armiger84/?hl=en

My General Modelling Blog: http://armiger84.blogspot.com/

I understand what you mean, and I suppose this rather oblique interpretation could hold, if such actions were actually viable in EA. Indeed, Fighters flying to attack artillery or other assault targets on turn 1 is the best way to get them killed in competitive metagames, due to their little resilience combined with the fully operational enemy AA. Fighters are currently used to finish off broken formations, and offering AA defensive fire against bombers.

The skimmer version posted above could actually alpha strike the enemy deployment zone much better than the fighter version.

_________________
"War is not about who is right, but about who is left". - B. Russell

The Storm Talon is a dual purpose VTOL craft, interceptor and hovering ground attacker. Having neither rotors nor being slow moving like a helicoptor makes the comparison inaccurate.

GW's background for the Storm Talon is clear that it's primary role is as an interceptor, escorting more important aircraft and dogfighting with supersonic interceptors. Only once enemy aircraft are dead or where none to be found will it's angle it's engines to the ground and hover to better attack ground targets. If represented as a skimmer it wouldn't be able to protect the SM army from aircraft properly as it should, while represented as an aircraft it can do this properly plus still perform ground attacks. You may not agree but there's a 21 page thread on the Stormtalon and stats to trial have been agreed upon which make it an aircraft.

White Scars and Raven Guard are noted to use them with a different strategy – using them more to spearhead attacks on the ground - but if they're included in those lists or not in this fashion is up to others and not relevant here.

What was agreed is that both versions should be trialed.

However, It's your call to decide if BT have access to one or the other, or both.

Perhaps it would be better to call it "Black Templar Storm Talon" or some such within this list in this case.

_________________
"War is not about who is right, but about who is left". - B. Russell

There are a couple of versions with different weapon loadouts that Dobbsy suggested trialing, both are aircraft though.

I'll just refer to it as the Stormtalon, because these stats reflect how a SM Stormtalon is normally used. If at some future point the White Scars and/or Raven Guard lists adopt it as a skimmer only they could call them their own version.

The 21 pages of debate have seen many versions, and there have been many advocates of the Skimmer Stromtalon.

The different variants are definitely worth polling. Shall you start the poll?

_________________
"War is not about who is right, but about who is left". - B. Russell