I feel that in the case of the Colossus, the special rule is absolutely justified, given the size of the weapon.

The fighting platforms may need work. They may need to be reduced in power or removed, or replaced with something else. Here are my thoughts on the effects of the platfroms:
1) The platform on the Stormlord is critical to the way it operates in 40k. Given recent developments surrounding Leviathan proxies, I felt it appropriate and thematic, and I believe you agreed on that point, to add a platform to the Leviathan as well.
2) They add a lot of firepower to the vehicle, but that firepower is paid for with the cost of the units using it.
3) It does increase the effective armor value of the unit using it, at the cost of increased vulnerability in the event of the destruction of the tank itself.
4) Perhaps allowing FF only is better. I've not had the chance to use actual shooting from the platform yet, and haven't formed an opinion.
5) Adding extra FF attacks may be an option, but they would be made at better than the carried unit's FF values, and would be available even when no troops are embarked to add them.
6) You could only add those attacks when troops are embarked. However, that would lead to the practice of leaving only one unit embarked to get the attacks, and this is undesirable. It also replaces a special rule with another special rule.

Overall, I think the number of units allowed to use the platforms is certainly up for movement if neccessary, as is overall cost. The pros and cons of the current rule seem to even out though, unlike alternatives. I think in the Stormlord's case in particular, in order to get the 'feel' of the tank, the platform is required in some form. The Leviathan was opportunistic, given the rule was already in use anyway, but could be removed if that's whats wanted.

Zombo, I'd have the same problem with large, multitemplate barrage that you have with the current 'nid spawning rules. It does feel wrong to me to turn a large bomb into a bunch of small ones, just like it feels wrong to you to have resurrection style spawning, even though that potentially has an established mechanic in the Necron list and is easier to balance in the GT scenario.

Yes, the old rule was felt to be overpowered. I wanted to get at least one test in for my own satisfation before I moved on it. We did, you'll note test, the more overpowered version alongside the more toned down version. We then toned it down further.

The current thread by nealhunt has the Leviathan as a part of an RHQ at ~175pts. The Leviathan is at a de facto cost of 275 currently. I'm open to raising it more if needed, but I don't think it is at this time.

My feeling is if those are the only problems you have with the list, that's pretty good. One I'm really not willing to move on yet, for the reasons I've stated. Both need more testing, and broader testing. If you can help in that testing, you would find one of two things: Either the Leviathan is fine as it is, as I currently believe, or it's not, and as I've said, it can be changed if neccessary. Looks like a win/win to me.

_________________
SG

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

If it's meant to be a bunker busting weapon or the like, then it's completely unjustified.

If it's meant to be a wide-area effect weapon, then it might be justified. Maybe.



Bear in mind, that a template the size of this one, considering Epic's sliding ground scale, would be on the order of a small to medium sized nuclear weapon.

Of course, making a large area effect weapon then BP2 is kinda weird. It'd be like a "soft" nuke or something.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Checking here, 15cm is 250m. the large template is 12.5cm across or around 100m blast radius, equivalent to the lower reported end of the Daisy Cutter. I agree if I've got the weapon style wrong I'll need to do some rethinking. As for the BP2, I'd personally prefer BP3, IC at 300 points, but I'm trying to make some tradeoffs for balance here.

_________________
SG

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

There's a big distinction to be made there; spawning definitely requires a new special rule, and in that case you should make it as accurate to what it's representing as possible. There's a big difference to me between using existing rules to represent something and using new special rules. Once you've made the decision that a special rule is utterly neccesary to represent something you should make it represent it properly.

If there was any way to represent spawning in the standard rules I'd be in favour of using that instead. For example, if the necron regeneration mechanism was in the standard rules I'd agree to its use in a heartbeat. The fact that a similar (but not the same) mechanism is used in another list is not justification for its use.



My point is that your test showed exactly what I and your opponent predicted, which I think hopefully shows that I have a good feel for what will be a problem.

I'm big on maths, and running the numbers on your large template MW wasn't hard, and tells you a lot more than a single playtest will. For example, in your test a fluke shot killed the plane. If it had done that before it dropped the bomb, would that have made it underpowered? Of course not, because a single playtest proves nothing compared to statistical averages.



Those are not my only problems with the list, others include the lack of stormlord sponsons (mostly because it could be used in other lists so should have standardised stats), special weapons squads and the lack of chimera mounted troops.

As far as I can see, a BP3 (Or even BP5+) template attack with good abilities will kill just as many enemy units as a "mega template" BP2 attack with moderate abilities, and won't require a unique special rule to do so.

Unless there's a huge justification from the rules or background text in Tactica Aeronautica, I can't see a need to run twice as hard to reach the same end point.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Do you have v1.1? Stormlords have sponsons, there are no Special Weapons Squads. I felt if Chimaeras were to be stripped out of all the core Companies, adding them in in support diluted the effect considerably.

_________________
SG

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

I hadn't noticed 1.1, no, checking it out now.

EDIT:

Cadian certainly make more use of chimeras than stormlords, why not have them as an upgrade option with a price premium?

I'll try to get ahold of those rules, then. Hopefully the Bunker has a copy on hand.

_________________
SG

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

Chimeras are rarer than in the Steel Legion, not absent entirely. I would like to see a Support Formation with them.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

It could be done. Would you be thinking something similar to the Minervan formation?

_________________
SG

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

Yep.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I can integrate that into the next version if there's pretty broad support for it. That'd bring the Support choices up to ten though. I'd certainly not want to add more than that without pruning out some.

_________________
SG

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

Here's the text of the colossus from Tactica (emphasis mine):


The Colossus bomb is a single huge guided bomb. Containing sophisticated guidance systems controlled from the bomber, it has an armour-penetrating tip, mass reactive fuse and a melta warhead backed up with up to 10,000kg of high explosive. The colossus is used to destroy heavily armoured targets and underground bases.

The Colossus must be dropped from altitude 5. To hit you must roll equal to or higher than the bomber's current speed, ie, at speed 3 you need a 3+ to hit.

If the target is hit do not roll for damage, instead roll 2D3, this is the amount of damage inflicted on the target. The Colossus still causes bomb creep, and any other targets within 3" are are as normal on a 2+, also taking 2D3 Damage points.


So it's a bunker-busting bomb designed for destroying high armoured targets, not a huge blasting but weak explosion.

Well that changes things. Let me look at it for a bit, but feel free to offer suggestions in the meantime.

_________________
SG

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

15cm BP3 TK(1), One Shot

or

15cm BP3 MW, Slow Firing