Oh and Gavin your ?3.20 change from the drinks on Tuesday is still in my back pocket, sorry, give it back to you next week
| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Two lists or edit the original? http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=12222 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | Two lists or edit the original? |
I still can't get my or's and of's right. Ha, no other option needed. The Imperial Guard rulebook list is, along with the Ork list, the most balanced of the Epic lists and held as a benchmark for others. There have been in the last few years several tweaks proposed, such as changes to units (most popular the Deathstrike change to indirect) and the list (such as snipers being 1-2 for 25 points each). As these army list changes are quite minor, rather than change the core list would it be better to where possible do these changes in a new Steel Legion list? The rulebook list then would be in no way invalidated and sitting alongside it would be the 'The fighting 57th (for example) Steel Legion Regiment'. This I mention after a confusing discussion on Tuesday over what rules were what currently for the Imperial Guard, with errata, alternate rulebook and original. In essence I do not want someone all keen turning up for a game and finding somehow their list is not what they expected. This approach could be feasible as the core list isn't flawed in any significant way. Stuff like random commissars aren't game breaking, merely annoying to some WYSIWYG players and so on. Further as I understand the GW stuff is locked now it I think more clearly brings in changes, or at least less confusingly. Understand I do not propose making major changes to the list, the current minimal changes would be the way forward. This is instead an alternative to having to change the core list, something not reflected on the GW website. |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | Two lists or edit the original? |
A very interesting proposal. I've gone for 'make a new list'... though perhaps in time it could come to be seen as a better list, and will become the de-facto replacement. |
|
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | Two lists or edit the original? |
Oh and Gavin your ?3.20 change from the drinks on Tuesday is still in my back pocket, sorry, give it back to you next week
|
|
| Author: | BlackLegion [ Fri Apr 04, 2008 12:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Two lists or edit the original? |
Well there is always the "True" Armageddon Steel Legion army aka as Steel Legion PDF
|
|
| Author: | Chroma [ Fri Apr 04, 2008 1:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Two lists or edit the original? |
Edit the rulebook list and, if you want to make more radical changes, create a new list under a different name, to avoid confusion. Changes to *units*, which is what I think almost all the "major" changes for Steel Legion/Imperial Guard lay, really have nothing to do with the army list organization. It's the IG units that need fixing/tweaking, not the army list. |
|
| Author: | Ginger [ Fri Apr 04, 2008 1:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Two lists or edit the original? |
Chris My preferred way forward is a compromise; As the text for the online rule book is being revised, I would like JJ to extract the Marines, IG and Orks and hold them in separate folders like all the other army lists both for simplicity and consistency. Whether this happens or not, we will then need a "separate list" for the IG with the minimal changes in it. To support this effort to the online rulebook, I believe each army champion should present a list of those changes already discussed and agreed by the community together with the revised army list. These minimal changes need to be spelled out in a clear, simple manner with a small description of the change to explain the reasoning. Ideally these proposals need to be produced ASAP so we can present them for inclusion with the change to the online rulebook - ?IMO by the end of June at the latest |
|
| Author: | Ginger [ Fri Apr 04, 2008 1:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Two lists or edit the original? |
(The_Real_Chris @ Apr. 04 2008,11:31) QUOTE Oh and Gavin your ?3.20 change from the drinks on Tuesday is still in my back pocket, sorry, give it back to you next week So it's your round on Tuesday? 
|
|
| Author: | CyberShadow [ Fri Apr 04, 2008 1:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Two lists or edit the original? |
Edit the rule book list. If a change is necessary, it should be made to the core list - since why would you not make a change to balance a list further? If a change is not necessary, then why are we making it in the first place? If we have two lists, one will eventually be seen as 'stronger' either with or without the changes, and this could lead to problems. If someone turns up with a 'rule book' list then that is up to them. If someone turned up to play me with a Swordwind Eldar list withouth including the new changes (either 1.8 or update!  ) then I would still play.
|
|
| Author: | nealhunt [ Fri Apr 04, 2008 1:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Two lists or edit the original? |
(Chroma @ Apr. 04 2008,13:03) QUOTE Edit the rulebook list and, if you want to make more radical changes, create a new list under a different name, to avoid confusion. I second this. Personally, I think minor tweaks to the list just to tune a few of the high spots would be of the most use to the community at large - the kind of thing a tourney organizer could copy/paste into a flier or onto a website and expect that it's not going to discourage people from fielding the army. If you want to do more than that, make a separate list. |
|
| Author: | Dave [ Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Two lists or edit the original? |
I agree with Chroma as well. |
|
| Author: | BlackLegion [ Tue Apr 08, 2008 10:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Two lists or edit the original? |
Yes. Call it "314th Armageddon Steel Legion Army List" or something. |
|
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Two lists or edit the original? |
Looking at how Epic is 'locked' I think the goal should be to have a combined NetEA list and a seperate one done for Fanatic (since they won't change the core). Yes it will be the de-facto list, but at least this way no-one will be surprised if they have net access. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|