Death Korps of Krieg v1.7 |
|
Evil and Chaos
|
Post subject: Death Korps of Krieg v1.7  Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 12:15 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
|
Here's version 1.7, an attempt to make the list specifically 'Infantry-focused', rather than 'Krieg-in-general-focused'.
1.71 updates:
Lance special rule removed
Leman Russ Destroyer given MW3+ shot instead as a consequence.
Trojan FF down to 6+
Death Riders moved back to Company status.
Latest Version: Version 1.71
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
J0k3r
|
Post subject: Death Korps of Krieg v1.7 Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 12:58 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 11:18 pm
Posts: 876
Location: Edinburgh, UK
|
E&C- I think the cull is a great idea, this version of the list is much more focused and is closer to my initial visions of what a DK army would be- huge formations of infantry ploughing forward with some heavy support and massed artillery. While I was quite happy with v.1.6 in terms of army structure I think this is a distinct improvement.
Also I noticed the inclusion of one SUPER HEAVY MORTAR... Is it... could it possibly be.... in the blue corner, the desolator of stygies 7, the purifier of hive hespera, ladies and gentlemen I give you... Ordinatus KREEIGGGG!! 
_________________
"Do not offend the Chair Leg of Truth; it is wise and terrible."
-Spider Jerusalem
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Evil and Chaos
|
Post subject: Death Korps of Krieg v1.7 Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:10 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
|
Incidentally, the model of the new Super-Heavy Mortar will look like this:
That's a Gorgon-hull by the way, to give an idea of the scale.
I'm thinking, BP3, Large Blast Template, 60cm indirect, ignores cover. (MW too good?)
Not quite ordinatus-level of destructiveness, but certainly well above standard artillery.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
J0k3r
|
Post subject: Death Korps of Krieg v1.7 Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:36 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 11:18 pm
Posts: 876
Location: Edinburgh, UK
|
|
Incidentally, any idea of whether FW will consider epic scale versions of the gorgon and centaur?
_________________
"Do not offend the Chair Leg of Truth; it is wise and terrible."
-Spider Jerusalem
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Evil and Chaos
|
Post subject: Death Korps of Krieg v1.7 Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:39 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
|
|
They're not currently on the radar (Though I have a conversion for the Centaur worked out that I'm working on).
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
orangesm
|
Post subject: Death Korps of Krieg v1.7 Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 2:59 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 1:50 pm
Posts: 482
Location: Greater Los Angeles Area, CA
|
|
I would say that neither the Tank Squadron should not get a 'rare' variant Leman Russ or that the Platoon should get 2 or 3.
Is there a reason to let all units take a Basilisk and Manticore platform?
The Marauder Destroyer would fit into the List well I think, possibly as a single Aircraft. We (as a community) need to develop the Destroyer more accurately along the lines of the Marauder Bomber and not as an independent Aircraft development.
I can see a Regiment having 3-5 Infantry Companies for any one of the support Companies, be it Armored, Artillery, Mech Inf, etc. The list definitely has an Infantry feel to it, with some nice supporting units. It feels distinict from the current list and looks very playable.
_________________ Airspace - AeroImp Forum
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
J0k3r
|
Post subject: Death Korps of Krieg v1.7 Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 4:44 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 11:18 pm
Posts: 876
Location: Edinburgh, UK
|
|
It is a lot, but then they are very short ranged to make up for it.
_________________
"Do not offend the Chair Leg of Truth; it is wise and terrible."
-Spider Jerusalem
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
orangesm
|
Post subject: Death Korps of Krieg v1.7 Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 7:46 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 1:50 pm
Posts: 482
Location: Greater Los Angeles Area, CA
|
|
I am going to field the question of having mechanized infantry as a support formation and the superheavies
While the core of the army is large infantry formations, an infantry regiment will have some reserve infantry in chimeras to plug holes in the line. I think this fits the bill. Possibly going smaller to 6 stands of infantry and 3 Chimeras for a Mech Inf Platoon.
For the superheavies, a Shadowsword I think would be important to a Siegebreaker army. It would be their to deal directly with Defensive Siege Engines, I think its range is sufficient to consider it direct artillery.
The list in my opinion should have all close (15cm) or long range (75cm+) weapons, minimal medium range (15-75cm) weapons.
_________________ Airspace - AeroImp Forum
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Lord Inquisitor
|
Post subject: Death Korps of Krieg v1.7 Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 9:27 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 1216
Location: Norfolk VA USA
|
|
Much better!
Again, the Lance and Thin Rear Armour rules are an issue. Even if you are going to keep them, since they are both for a single vehicle each, I would move them to the Notes section of the datafax. I would also remove the "titans and aircraft" special rule either into the army list or to the "how to use the army list" section. That's not really an army special rule - it applies to just about every army. The less army special rules the better! I would stick to the format of the normal IG list as much as possible.
I know it hurts to cut so much out of a list, but believe me, it is better.
As for Lance and Thin Rear Armour, for the former I can see where you're going with it. Still looks fishy, though. As for the latter, that is perhaps okay because it only applies to a WE. But I think some sort of Crossfire rule would be better and fit more smoothly with the established E:A mechanics.
More comments later, but one thing I wanted to ask you was "what do you want from this list?" If you want to make it an official, balanced IG variant list, more concessions will need to be made. If you're just looking for a "fun" list, then that's another matter - it is good to set out exactly what you're looking for!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Evil and Chaos
|
Post subject: Death Korps of Krieg v1.7 Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 12:13 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
|
|
Replies to Lord Inquisitor:
Again, the Lance and Thin Rear Armour rules are an issue. Even if you are going to keep them, since they are both for a single vehicle each, I would move them to the Notes section of the datafax.
As I posted before, the Lance rule is currently applied to two units (Destroyer & Medusa).
As to the Thin Rear Armour rule, I'm happy with it at the moment, because it only applies to a single rather large (Baneblade sized) war engine, it'll be easy to find whether units are in the rear arc or not.
I'd consider putting the two rules in the unit's notes, but Lance is already a known Special Rule rather than a note, while Thin Rear Armour is rather wordy to go in the notes.
I would also remove the "titans and aircraft" special rule either into the army list or to the "how to use the army list" section.
That's fair enough, it's only there to make explicit what was previously implicit, since the list currently lacks a 'how to use the army list' section.
I know it hurts to cut so much out of a list, but believe me, it is better.
I'm quite happy with this version of the list.
Not sure what might be worthy of pruning next though. 
More comments later, but one thing I wanted to ask you was "what do you want from this list?" If you want to make it an official, balanced IG variant list, more concessions will need to be made. If you're just looking for a "fun" list, then that's another matter - it is good to set out exactly what you're looking for!
I want to help create a Death Korps of Krieg list. That's what we're looking for.
The problem is that everyone has their own thoughts on what the DKoK look like... so what I'm looking for currently is consensus (Within reason... I've studied the background carefully and I'm prepared to lay down the law on certain issues if I feel it nessesary).
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Evil and Chaos
|
Post subject: Death Korps of Krieg v1.7 Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 12:25 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
|
|
Replies to Hena:
Medusa. This is too good. What is the point of the Leman Russ Destroyer as this is so much better. So I'd suggest 2BP and lose Ignore Cover (or alternative Lance, but the fluff text would support that better).
BP3 is deserved IMHO considering the short range, fluff text & 40k rules... I'm considering dropping Lance.
Artillery batteries. These are too cheap. The IG artillery rarely moves in a game so move 0 is not much of an detriment. Also with transports it's harder to break these formations. So all in all these should be more expensive. So I suggest new pricing.
Company: 600+100
Support: 200+75
You're aware that this would make them more expensive than their self-propelled equivilients... which have the ability to move and fire in the same turn?
Also I would downgrade the trojan to have 6+FF and 25cm move.
6+FF is deserved.
25cm move is not deserved however I feel. In the fluff Trojans are faster than Chimeras by 10kmph, and moving the platforms denies an entire round of shooting. I'm hesitant to mess with that dynamic before some heavy playtesting.
The amount of Super Heavies is slightly large. Remove shadowsword at least (it's weapons don't really fit the list). Possibly baneblade as well if that superheavy bombard what-not is added. One might consider the Stormsword possible to have Thick Rear Armour, but drop the siege cannon to 2BP. Left and Right fire Arc to heavy bolter + heavy flamer pairs instead of 360 to all?
Weapon arcs are a good idea.
Thick Rear Armour isn't justified by the 40k rules / background iirc (Though I may be wrong there).
I'd like to keep the full selection of Superheavies... the two 'common' Superheavies, plus the two short-ranged 'Siege' Superheavies.
Is it possible to have upgrades to support formations? I'd say no, but why does some of them can have chimeras, when companies cannot have them.
OrangeSM fielded this one nicely... these represent the hole-plugging or breech-breaking reserve troopers.
Functionally, they duplicate the job of the Centaur or Chimera-mounted Grenadiers and are a strong candidate for removal in the next version of the list, as they're only there to provide extra choice right now.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Lord Inquisitor
|
Post subject: Death Korps of Krieg v1.7 Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 12:30 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 1216
Location: Norfolk VA USA
|
|
So you want to make it an "official" list then?
The most sensible thing to do at this stage (if you haven't already done so) is write out a short blurb about what you think the Death Korps of Krieg should be about. This can just be a bullet points list of the things that are good/bad/unique to the Death Korps.
For example, one of the things that comes to mind with me is that the Death Korps are extremely brave ... or rather fatalistic. Perhaps some kind of army special rule reducing BM in some way - not too much, they shouldn't have ATSKNF. Maybe they require MORE BM than one per unit to break the formation? Something like that?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
