You, E&C and I had a heated discussion offboard on an unrelated matter, after which you log on here for the first time in months and immediately suggest we're being hypocritical. Please don't use my real name without permission.



Being against one special rule on one list is not the same as being against all special rules in all lists. I'm sure I can find a post where you're in favour of a special rule and use that against you in the same way, but I'm not going to.



Agreeing with my posts on the Inquisition list. That has nothing to do with this one.



E&C has an Elysian army and we're actively looking to have a good list to play them with.



I'm not proposing anything concrete, just throwing around ideas to try to start discussion on possible alternative directions. If that sort of discussion is unwarranted then no list will ever go anywhere.



I don't expect anything of the sort. Again, let me reiterate: I'm not suggesting any specific idea be adopted, just throwing around several possible ideas for group discussion to see if a better alternative can be come up with than the current. You know, how ideas for list development are always done.

Alright, so we have zombo, who is arguing against VTOL, but maybe for something else, and Mosc, who is arguing against VTOL, and thinks something else probably isn't neccessary. Why is the discussion concentrating on VTOL? Perhaps we can switch things up and talk about what we disagree on?

I personally like the idea of planetfalling valks, but not that of high altitude Valks, which are not represented in the Teleport rule because the Epic battlespace shouldn't extend up to 50,000ft, the average HALO jump height. I'm not convinced either are needed, though, not having had enough experience playing the list.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

Zombocom, It seems to me you're still agitated over the Facebook discussion on economics that WE had and happens to be on the heels of my post out here. You might want to take a break for a day and re-read this post and see if you are still upset. Maybe you are mistakenly equating being offensive with disagreeing, after us having an emotionally charged non-Epic related argument? If that's the case I don't know what else to say to you other than what I have said already. I preempted my post saying that it was not an attack on you, I apologized when I didn't have to for any offense taken. If I thought so poorly of you, why did I ASK YOU to take over the Necron Champ position? That was not prompted by the NetERC or Cybershadow. It was because I felt you capable.

--

As to why I am out here, this is why...
From Honda in a personal email dated today:
"As a heads up, I would like you to begin participating in the Elysian thread. There have been some changes and things that bothered you probably won't anymore. You don't have to go to any other thread, but I would like you to start helping out on this one. In particular, I'd like you to drive the discussion on the Support sentinels. I'm not going away, I'm just doing some deep re-thinking on where we are so that we can get to where we need to be. There's a couple of posts you'll want to read.

More later.

Honda"

Jim is a friend of mine and I agreed to help him.
----

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Mosc, I'll accept your word that this had nothing to do with our earlier discussion, and that it wasn't an intentional attack.

I believe you didn't intend to, but you have unfairly characterised my views and suggested hypocrisy. Please see my other responses for why your interpretation of my position was wrong.

The fact that you had to preface it as "this is not an attack" means that you knew it could be read as such. For now let's avoid posts that could even be considered an attack.

It is REALLY good to see you back here Mosc.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

Onyx... Good for who!? ~
----
Can we get this back on track because I want my Elysians all tidy. If somebody doesn't post about how they love my Support Sentinels ideas I am just going to cry and go away again.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

I'd say 45cm works. It would hardly be the first weapon to get a range increase from it's 40K version (Whirlwinds, for example).

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

Do you prefer it with or without indirect doubling? I personally think they need an AP5+/AT6+ indirect, but the range I am 'meh' on. I initially tossed out a range of 35-40cm to Honda to have it double to 70-80cm on indirect, but I know how people get when things are not in blocks of 25 - get out the duct tape cuz a head is gonna explode!

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Indeed. I often wonder if we should just divide everything by 5 and play on smaller boards.

I think 30cm is justifiable, and 45 cm is justifiable. I think 30 feels slightly more natural, but 45 would work and I think I'd get used to it in about fifteen minutes.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

You guys are prolific if nothing else.

Ok, let me help set some of the framework for this discussion. There are things that are on the table to be discussed and there are things that are not going to change. I would like us to focus on big rocks first.

1. SR3 - I am intrigued by this, not that it hadn't been considered before, but because there seems to be a consensus that it is applicable. In the earlier versions, it split about 50/50 and so until we had other areas worked out, I took the approach that left the list weaker. I am of the firm belief that it is better to ease up than tighten down.

So, this is approved for testing.

2. Teleport. It stays. It works. It is the best way to simulate what actually takes place. So let's just move off of the idea that we're going to have any special rule that kinda sorta does part of teleport, but not really. It's not worth the effort of going there.

3. This is an odd idea that occurred to me, more because it models a 40K behaviour (which I don't always think is a bad thing) and perhaps provides a capability. What if the Elysians had the ability to move on the table from offboard, ala Reserves in 40K? This would apply to non-garrison, non-teleport forces. The thinking behind it is to prevent taking hits too soon (they're not on the table yet) and retain some strategic initiative on the battlefield.

4. Iron Discipline. Stays.

5. The army as a whole needs the ability to increase activations. One way of doing that is reducing costs. I'm sure there are others. Let's talk about ways to do that. If I recall correctly, earlier versions of used to put a higher number of activations in 3K than we are currently doing. I think that is hampering things.

6. As posted in previous notes, I like Signal's proposal for Lighting's. The only thing I would mention is that in a recent "learner's" game we had (2 x 1500 pt armies per side), an Eldar player had two of the large Vampire assault ships. He got one in before I had put up my CAP, but left the other one on stand down because he didn't want to chance the four ship element of the Lightnings. During the game he said he would take a chance with two, but not four and as if to prove a point, he brought it on late in the game (when it didn't matter) for a ground attack and I shot it down. The four ship formation is very effective, but not cheap. So that's something to think about.

7. Let's leave the Cyclops as is. I think that we're on the right track, but that it hasn't been tested enough. There was a proposal to drop the cost and that is under consideration.

8. Let's get the Support sentinels sorted out. One weapon system or two? What point cost? I think it makes sense to make them some sort of upgrade to the stand alone sentinel formation, but will not include them as in the upgrade to Drop companies.

9. Let's leave the Tauros/Venators as is for now. There are bigger fish to fry.

10. Decoupling Valkyries/Vendettas. Well, if we stick closely to the source material, Valkyries are dedicated transports and should be an upgrade. However, Vendettas are not and perhaps they should have their own formation like Vultures do. Thoughts on that? Should we approach them with a broad stroke and focus on letting them be gunships or still allow them to transport 8 units of infantry? Are we running into any rules issues by doing that?

11. Storm Troopers will not be forced to take Valkyries and will be able to use their Teleport capability.

12. Ah yes, the mortar. I am currently leaning towards four units, priced appropriately (looking for recommendations), a core formation, one per 3000 pts, as currently stated. The idea being, it's there to provide some cheap BM application to support an assault, it's not powerful enough to constitute a real artillery formation, but if used properly, can be beneficial in an assault. Examples of this type of use are in IA3.

I think that if we can get those items sorted out, then we're in a good spot to begin some serious testing...or at least I will be. We'll each want to try the things we like to play with (i.e. Mosc and his sentinels), but with enough games in we'll have some of the data we'll need to get to the next step.

All things being equal, I'll be pitting them against Tau next week.

Cheers,

_________________
Remember Taros? We do.

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

1. Sounds like a good plan.
3. I honestly don't like the sound of this, both because I think other people will then try it and because it just...doesn't feel right. Plus, I thought they were DROP troops, not "walk" troops.
5. Reduce costs, add a few more support units (or another base formation), and activations will blossom, IMO.
6. The way I understand it, effective is hardly something to be despondent about in this case.
8. In regard to Support Sentinels - I'd recommend the missile launcher. The list has plentoy of shortish-range options as it is. If they're an upgrade to the extant Sentinels, I think the Sentinel formation would need to be bigger (or it would need to be four Sentinels and one Support Sentinel, and their missions rather conflict). You could add in HB Sentinels and mix Support Sentinels in with them, but that feels kinda messy.
10. I'm not sure you need to decouple them, but I think it would be worth creating an independent Valkyrie/Vendetta formation to represent Vendettas working as gunships.
12. One option for restricting the mortars would be to have them as an option for the Regimental HQ. However, I must ask - why restrict them so much in Epic when they're not nearly so rare in 40K? Is it just the sheer utility of the extra range they'd provide?

* * *

Have you given thought to expanding the unit options available?
Heavy Bolter Sentinels might provide more firepower - and it makes sense if they're the primary source of heavy weapons for an Elysian force. A Heavy Bolter Sentinel Company might expand the list's capabilities without overly unbalancing things. It would also give the Support Sentinels somewhere natural to be.
Special Weapon Elysians could be useful - multiple grenade launchers/plasma guns/whatever per stand.
Another option might be increasing the number of Fire Support units available in the upgrade, or making Mortars a Support option.

One question: why not include Tarantulas? They'd screen well, they're cheap, and they've been in both versions of the list. Models can be tricky to come by, but it's possible to do it, and proxying is easy if you have a few spare Land Raider turrets...

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

Interesting proposal. With the ability to Teleport, it seems like it might be too easy to keep all the troops off the battlefield until the final turn, using your teleport and reserves to strike really heavily where you can secure the most objectives. Would it work something along the lines of a Webway portal where the back edge is treated as one large, linear portal?


My experience has largely been that I start out the game with roughly 2-4 more activations than my opponent. By the beginning of the third turn, however, I'm usually down to about 3-4 fewer effective formations, and most of those aircraft. This definitely has something to do with my opponent playing Space Marines, (and ATSKNF/1+ Init) but I do feel like it might be a good idea to buttress out some of the formations a little. Tauros definitely come to mind here as something which is cheap, but can be easily rendered combat-ineffective by a single strafing run by Thunderbolts. Maybe make them two fluff squadrons (6 vehicles) working in concert?


I've had a similar experience, where enemy Thunderhawks have stood-down rather than face the four-Lightning CAP. Having the larger interdiction formation is definitely great, but I wasn't able to CAP any Thunderbolt attacks, simply because my Lightnings were effectively committed to keeping his Air Assault off the board. Half-strength formations would be a great addition for the low-level threats, but being able to keep that heavy interception force really lets you apply pressure on air armies.


I'd say one weapon system is generally preferred, as it makes it easier to ensure each unit has a role to fill. Do you think Support Sentinels serve more of an Indirect Fire Tank-hunting role, or more of a versatile force-multiplier? Regardless I'd say that they should use range-doubling, (as it's standard practice) and possibly lean more towards a 45cm range, as there isn't much capable of long-range threat right now anyway. Definitely agree on them not being in the Drop Companies, as that just doesn't fit.


Interesting, but it feels like the Vendettas would be running pretty harshly into the role of the Vultures in that case. Making sure these units fulfill unique roles is probably important. Right now I'd say that Vultures let you project a nasty salvo of AT fire just about anywhere on the board, (but only once) whereas Vendettas can carve apart armored targets who get too close to the formation they're part of. Making them both independent formations might blur their purposes together a bit more than currently. If Vultures weren't a core unit, I'd say give them Sniper

Can we please keep this on track and keep open-minded? And, please try to remember that people are going to have different opinions and these are sometimes imperfectly expressed on forums. That said, we also shouldnt automatically assume that people are suggesting or attacking opinions. can we keep debate and discussion friendly and inclusive?



Also, lets not bring in bad feelings or past discussions that occurred outside these boards. They are closed by nature and therefore it is very easy for them to fall into the 'he said' trap. I am not saying that this is happening here, just that it could. At the end of the day, we have the same goals here, and they are far more likely to be realised by taking a deep breath before reading and reacting, and pausing and re-reading before posting.



Finally, lets not jump to pointing fingers, adopting a defensive stance and assuming hostile intentions right off the bat. We are free to speculate, discuss and posit ideas, but changes should be gradual and measured.

Please note that I will be watching this thread. Please keep it civil, guys. Thanks.

_________________
https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond.
https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.

I'm short of time today, but will just say "ABSORBING"...

I did find some older lists and at least one older battle report that I will post in this thread.

Thanx for the feedback so far.

_________________
Remember Taros? We do.

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment