What I try to do is called combined arms.When using multi faction formations I will try to get each one to work at it's best.

An example of what I'd try to do just so we are on the same wavelength.

1) Tzeentch Coven formation would summon Flamers and move in FF range of an enemy formation.If possible it would shoot at a different enemy formation or I would even try to assault an enemy formation and use the consolidation move to then get in FF support range of another assault.
2) Slaanesh Coven or Titan would retain and attempt to assault with the Tzeentch formation in support.

I'm not trying to do a combined assault but trying to combine the best parts of each faction to work together focusing the main engage action on 1 enemy formation.

This is where multi faction forces (in my opinion,as stated in the other post) are not as good or successful as mono ones.
You find you have to retain to do big assaults or the enemy can counter your now obvious plans so it's usually more failed activations.




If your using the Tzeentch towers for long range and I assume the Khorne at close range for assaults then why are you having any problems at all with the Factions rule in any form.
There's no way they'd have to be within 30cm of each other unless you are trying to combine there efforts and abilities on 1 target.I'm not talking Tzeentch and Khorne attack the same target but that one (Tzeentch) is using it's usually better FF abilities to support an assault by the other (Khorne).
When I play with separate factions they still target different formations I just try to get the best out of the FF Tzeentch by having them in position to help out an assault by Slaanesh, this I call combining the formations to use the best of their  abilities on one target.



Again if your doing this then why do the different factions have to be within 30cm you could do that with the same factions and not suffer from the factions rule.



Yes you can but when you do that there is no need at all to have the formations within faction rule range.
That's unless your wanting to use a good FF formation to support a good assault formation and combining their abilities on 1 target (again not saying they attack the same target but Tzeentch gets in FF range of the second assault).

I'm not disagreeing with you Hena, I'm trying to say that I find, when I play, the multi faction armies do worse because of trying to make the formations work together.
Even with the old factions rule not just with the new trial faction rule I've found this.

Very intruiging comments, were you playing with BL or against them; and what was the other army?

On the issue of speed, the other option was to put AA on the Defiler - would that be a better alternative?

On range, I am curious how the Stalker 30cm range is superior to the Obliterator 45cm? Is that because the Stalker has superior movement, allowing it to catch enemy A/c that have already moved in the "AA rush"? Given that suffers a -1 to shooting resulting in 4x 7+ shots it will usually just lay a BM. (or did you have something else in mind?)

On the 'more BMs' I see your point, given the intial retinue size is 8 rising to 12 with Rhinos. However I would suggest the addition of these soft skinned vehicles provides more chance of adding the BMs in the first place, as well as the Stalker being much more vulnerable to artillery and aircraft attacks than the Obliterator. Doesn't that provide better balance?

I am not sure why 4x 6+AA attacks was chosen, though I would suggest that it does provide a good incentive to try to take out the AA, which is what the game is all about isn't it?

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Playing against with a Codex Marine army.



In my view yes,it would help keep a much needed weakness in the BL list. The adding of the Stalker felt that a big weakness had been removed.



It wasn't that the stalker itself was better,as I'd stated the unit in itself was fine.
As stand alone units the Oblit is still far greater than the Stalker.
Even the Mech. retinues themselves were no more effective than Mech. retinues I'd faced at tourneys without stalkers.
For me though it's how the AA units work with the retinues and how the retinues themselves can now work better along with the rest of the army that make's a massive difference.

I felt it's effective AA was better:-

the extra attack.

the bigger formation so more kills/BM's against the formation was needed to affect it's abilities.

the formation itself could hide from being attacked better,especially in the 1st turn where it can be behind cover and avoid being targeted by most of the enemies forces until it moves.

the Oblits retinues(that I've faced and seen) usually start garrisoned in cover or end up rushing for cover.For the whole retinue to be effective they have to be within 10cm of the edge of the cover which makes them easier to target, especially any garrisoned forward as I get to choose the placement of the forward objectives that they can garrison from so I can usually hit them on a single move from my Deployment Zone.

the threat of "flak rush" was far greater.

the ability of the retinues (and it's AA umbrella) to now keep up with the,before,faster WE's/Raptors/Bikes/Scouts etc. allows the whole army to move around with a little more freedom.


This (I believe) is the key to why it was better,it allowed the whole army to work with much better synergy and effectiveness for me it was too good, maybe that is how some think it should work.
The previous big weakness of the list the slow moving Oblits inability to keep up with a fast paced army in an ever changing battlefield was now gone.

BL can already opt to be mobile by dropping ground AA cover in favour of A/c. So presumably the reason why BL tend to be slower at present is actually because the Obliterator is universally employed because of its great strengths. This raises the question whether the 'mobile BL' is better than the 'slower BL' per se, and also the impact of the Obliterators in that comparison.

However I do take your point about the mobile AA cover being a distinct benefit, obviously the Retinue can advance more rapidly into position, though I am less sure about the resilience of the formation. Given there are only four Rhinos, wouldn't they still be more vulnerable to armies with reasonable AT capabilities? Equally, any Rhinos lost are more than likely to reduce the formation mobility aren't they?

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

How many players, with any army, opt to not use ground AA and rely on aircraft? Nobody that I've ever seen

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

I had the retinues hidden behind terrain with fighters on CAP - so any attack would have to be by tbolts through the stalker+air cover AA or risking a loaded thawk.

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

Me. The World Eaters do not have any on purpose. As it is, 23 games later and still no ground based AA.

Now if I had the choice, then you are correct, I would choose to take ground based AA. I just thought I would make the point however..

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

Hey there, if you need LATD or Nurgle Marine images for the new book contact me.

_________________

My Photobucket

They can but with the stalker the there isn't a weakness to the list.

From following the development of the BL list and especially the addition of the stalker I get the impression players thought it would lower the power of the list.

From the games against Steve54 it does the opposite, although the AA unit is weaker it ups the power of the list as a whole. For me it's having the opposite intended effect.

I don't think anyone wanted the overall power of the list to shift with the AA change. They just wanted:

A- To kill the annoyance issues with the Mary-Sue Obliterators.
and
B- To give the Black Legion an "organic" AA choice which could be envisiaged fighting alongside the rest of the Black Legion armies before Obliterators were created (which is supposed to have happened thousands of years after the Heresy, IIRC).

Shifting the list's balance was a secondary concern compared to the overriding demands of A & B, and in my opinion can easily be fixed by pricing the Stalker correctly.

If it is significantly altering the power of the list, then we should make it more expensive, or worse in stats, so as to re-balance the mech. style, not just give up at the first hurdle.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

And isn't this part of the intention:- the BL have now made use of air cover to bolster the ground AA rather than relying on it alone. Doing this changes the shape of the BL list (to match a particular style of play of course), and is opening up the list to strategies other than those which slavishly include the Oblits.

However, rather than increasing the list's power, perhaps this mobility may just be demonstrating something that I have said for a long time; that the list is slightly overpowered. I do understand what Dptdexys is presenting, that it is the synergy between the Retinues and the other various elements of the list that provides the strength in the BL army, and the 'inbuilt weakness' is to make some parts slower than others. My concern is that this 'inbuilt weakness' was provided through the Obliterator, IMHO one of the most powerfull units in the game even without AA.

On E&C's point, I am not sure that it is a question of increasing the cost of the Stalker. For example, I am not sure it is a "Hunter" level cost of 75 points. Equally, I don't think dropping the stats to 3x AA6+ will make that much difference, especially given the suggestion that it is the added mobility the Stalker gives the army that is causing this rather than the actual AA ability. However I do agree we should keep trying various alternatives here.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Gavin makes some good points there IMO.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter