Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Discussion on LatD changes
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=82&t=22194		 Page 1 of 9
Author:  Tiny-Tim [ Wed Jan 04, 2012 12:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Discussion on LatD changes
With the new year started i'm starting this thread to allow people to post their thoughts on possible changes to the list.

First off, with two existing Traitor Guard fan lists already out there I would like to hear people's opinions & how it will affect their current lists if we drop everything that is referred to as Traitor.

From my point of view I would suffer from the loss of Hydras, Thunderbolts and Roughriders.
Author:  madd0ct0r [ Wed Jan 04, 2012 1:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion on LatD changes
I'm still experimenting with approaches to a demon engines list:

Although I've not posted it yet, I think a better approach would be a modular system, similar to the Ordinatus in the Ad-mech pdf list.
This would be intended to allow people to field demon engines similar enough to the old demon engines for the models to work well as counts - as.
It would also allow people with other models to field their creations. It's just a bugger to balance.

I've also noticed a possible route / supplement for this list to follow - one of the tanith's antagonists was an undivided faction that fielded enormous woe engines. Since the blood pact are one of the two traitor guard lists, it'd also go well in a Gaunt's Ghosts supplement.

I will need to do some research.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Wed Jan 04, 2012 2:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion on LatD changes
What would be the rationale to remove the "Traitor" elements, to concentrate more on the mad civilian rabble + daemon engines I guess?
Author:  Tiny-Tim [ Wed Jan 04, 2012 2:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion on LatD changes
Rationale is to make this a more focused list and then we can go back over the existing traitor guard lists to make sure that we have elements that people want to play covered.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Wed Jan 04, 2012 2:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion on LatD changes
Focused on the civilian uprising elements?

Removal of Hydras would effectively neuter L&TD AA, of course.
Author:  Ulrik [ Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion on LatD changes
A civillian uprising list would be cool, but how the hell do they get Plague Towers and Subjugators?
Author:  fredmans [ Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion on LatD changes
I will try to make next year a LatD year, and therefore I have studied the list quite a lot lately. Since Traitor Support and Daemonic Engine formations compete for the same slots, Traitor Support seems to be chosen more often than not. If the list focus should be Daemonic Engines, I suspect Traitor Support would have to go. The army as a whole would suffer a bit, since you effectively remove scout screens, aircraft and AA, which means those aspects have to be covered in new ways.

For the Hydra problem, how about a "rabble" AA approach? An LV Land Transporter which trades Transport for Ork-ish AA. 30 cm, 2 x AA6+? Goes well with the Mechanized Covens and would have stats similar to the generic Heavy Weapons already used by the list. LatD already suffers from proxying/building/converting anyway, so model availability means nothing anyway. Those who have Hydras could easily play counts-as.

I suspect the Griffon, Russ, Hellhound and Fire Support upgrades could be dispensed with as well.

/Fredmans
Author:  Ulrik [ Wed Jan 04, 2012 3:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion on LatD changes
IMO traitor elements should not be in the same list as daemon engines, unless you're talking about ancient traitors like Blood Pact or Chaos Space Marine legions.

Or am I misunderstanding how quick and easy it is to make daemon engines?
Author:  nealhunt [ Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion on LatD changes
Tiny-Tim wrote:
First off, with two existing Traitor Guard fan lists already out there I would like to hear people's opinions & how it will affect their current lists if we drop everything that is referred to as Traitor.

From my point of view I would suffer from the loss of Hydras, Thunderbolts and Roughriders.

Personally, I think that sounds pretty extreme. As noted, Hydras and T-bolts being out would seriously hinder AA. You'd have only Altars and Doomwings, both of which force certain flavor/style elements on the player. You would probably need to add in something to replace those elements, like Helltalons.

Another option to for more flavor focus and less mechanical complexity would be to shift more of the independent traitor units to Coven upgrades instead of independent formations. That would allow some IG elements to represent seized assets, former IG in serious decline and so on (and let people keep using their painted minis) without full-on independent "traitor company" formations.
Author:  Tiny-Tim [ Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion on LatD changes
Keep on posting, I'm reading and listening.
Author:  BlackLegion [ Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion on LatD changes
Somwhere on this forum there are three Vraksian Renegade lists.
The original Vraksian Renegades
The Servants of Slaughter (Vraksian Traitors with Khorne elements)
And Servants of Decay (Vraksian Traitors with Nurgle elements)

None of these feature Daemon Engines.
Author:  Ulrik [ Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion on LatD changes
What are the Lost and the Damned, exactly?
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion on LatD changes
Quote:
Another option to for more flavor focus and less mechanical complexity would be to shift more of the independent traitor units to Coven upgrades instead of independent formations.

I'd note that 90% of the time Upgrades are eschewed in favour of grabbing another independent formation instead. Unless you make prices extremely low, or provide a huge boost in power (like AA) then they're rarely worth taking.
Author:  nealhunt [ Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion on LatD changes
Evil and Chaos wrote:
I'd note that 90% of the time Upgrades are eschewed in favour of grabbing another independent formation instead. Unless you make prices extremely low, or provide a huge boost in power (like AA) then they're rarely worth taking.

I'd say that's an internal balance issue. If activation count is clearly better than bigger/stronger formations, then that needs to be reviewed for appropriate point costs, i.e. look at possibly higher activation cost with cheaper upgrades to balance the options against each other.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Wed Jan 04, 2012 5:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Discussion on LatD changes
No objection to that.
Page 1 of 9 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/