Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
Proposed LatD revised army list structure http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=82&t=23086 |
Page 1 of 2 |
Author: | Tiny-Tim [ Thu Apr 19, 2012 4:45 pm ] | ||
Post subject: | Proposed LatD revised army list structure | ||
Right lets try this again. Below are the initial proposals for the new list structure for the LatD army.
|
Author: | nealhunt [ Thu Apr 19, 2012 7:13 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed LatD revised army list structure |
Tim, don't take this the wrong way, but I don't understand what this is intended to accomplish. Basically, what the allies split does is add a 6th faction - Traitor - so that only traitor covens can take traitor faction support. It seems like the allies split is adding another mathematical cross-check to see if the army is legal, but it doesn't really change much. Sidenote: As written, you've effectively increased the Zombie allotment to 4 formations. It's a flat 0-2 restriction, so either list could take 2 + 2 as allies. |
Author: | Ulrik [ Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:54 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed LatD revised army list structure |
I agree with Neal that the division isn't going to do much if you keep the "other part" as an allies section. My suggestion would be that you start by paring down the LatD list to a pure "cultist" list (the background for the old LatD list is that is a the Stigmatus cult, a big cult that has started an uprising). I think a good list needs a focus, and the Stigmatus Coven is perfect. Some ideas for that: - The cult has access to captured imperial tanks and other vehicles, but they're disorganized and not present in large concentrations. Add infantry to Leman Russ and Basilisk formations, but reduce the number of each type (so, say 4 Russes and 6 infantry, and maybe 3 basilisks and 3 infantry). The cult doesn't have dedicated armor formations, but rather large mobs which have managed to capture some tanks or artillery pieces. Combine Rough Riders and Sentinels into one formation (2 or 3 units of each). If these mixed formations are found to be a bit weaker than formations of just a single type, reduce the points. - Move the daemon engines into another list that features them. They scream "from the eye of terror" to me, not something a cult on a hive world slaps together. A cult has secretly taken root and now they're suddenly emerging into the open - with Questor Titans and Lords of Battle? Really? Replace with daemonically possessed vehicles (could be a character upgrade like I put into the traitor pdf list I threw together). - Maybe add a "technical"-type vehicle? (The trucks with machine guns they use in africa.) LV, some with a heavy stubber, some with a missile launcher. Upgrade to a Coven, or maybe in a new formation of 6 infantry in Land Transporters and 3-4 technicals. - For air support you have Hydras and Marauders, but how about a formation of daemons that use Fighter rules? By the rules they're simply Fighter Aircraft, but for models and backgrounds they are flocks of daemons summoned at the start of the battle to attack enemy aircraft. |
Author: | wargame_insomniac [ Thu Apr 19, 2012 11:41 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed LatD revised army list structure |
Ulrik wrote: I agree with Neal that the division isn't going to do much if you keep the "other part" as an allies section. My suggestion would be that you start by paring down the LatD list to a pure "cultist" list (the background for the old LatD list is that is a the Stigmatus cult, a big cult that has started an uprising). I think a good list needs a focus, and the Stigmatus Coven is perfect. Some ideas for that: - The cult has access to captured imperial tanks and other vehicles, but they're disorganized and not present in large concentrations. Add infantry to Leman Russ and Basilisk formations, but reduce the number of each type (so, say 4 Russes and 6 infantry, and maybe 3 basilisks and 3 infantry). The cult doesn't have dedicated armor formations, but rather large mobs which have managed to capture some tanks or artillery pieces. Combine Rough Riders and Sentinels into one formation (2 or 3 units of each). If these mixed formations are found to be a bit weaker than formations of just a single type, reduce the points. - Move the daemon engines into another list that features them. They scream "from the eye of terror" to me, not something a cult on a hive world slaps together. A cult has secretly taken root and now they're suddenly emerging into the open - with Questor Titans and Lords of Battle? Really? Replace with daemonically possessed vehicles (could be a character upgrade like I put into the traitor pdf list I threw together). - Maybe add a "technical"-type vehicle? (The trucks with machine guns they use in africa.) LV, some with a heavy stubber, some with a missile launcher. Upgrade to a Coven, or maybe in a new formation of 6 infantry in Land Transporters and 3-4 technicals. - For air support you have Hydras and Marauders, but how about a formation of daemons that use Fighter rules? By the rules they're simply Fighter Aircraft, but for models and backgrounds they are flocks of daemons summoned at the start of the battle to attack enemy aircraft. I have said before that we need this as one PDF with all different unit stats and then 5 single page army lists. We already have the Vraksian renegades, Bloody hand and Daemon world lists. Just need a Stigmatus Coven and a Daemon Engine list- splitting existing list in roughly half. Agree with Ulrik that Stigmatus Coven would get limited IG choices- platoons not companies. (Or if you want lower tech then choices from Barran Siegemasters). AA would be hydras and maybe limited access to Thunderbolts. That will keep happy those new players who want to do a cultist list using the GW Chaos Infantry Warband box plus IG vehicles. Then you have the daemon engine lists with little or no IG stuff. AA would be Tzeentch flyers and the FW Hellblade/Hell Talon. That will keep those players happy like myself who have an old-school collection of daemon engines. Simples! James |
Author: | Tiny-Tim [ Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:10 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed LatD revised army list structure |
Thanks for the responses guys, The way the lists are now split up are to allow current players to mainly keep their current lists but with more focus on one of the two aspects. I have considered the technical route & even adding in Sabre AA platforms, I might continue along this route. My wording of the Allies section might be a bit wooly as I am intending that only the Core and Support options from the allies list are used and not allowing the number of Zombie Infestations to be doubled. The question might be that should the Cultist list be named as a Daemon Engine List and the PDF list renamed as the LatD list then we can concentrate on that list to get something workable? & I have no problems with Daemon Engines suddenly appearing on worlds, they are big places and you don't know for how long they have been there, being constructed, being worshipped. What I don't want to do is to end up having the Daemon Engines restricted to SM Cult lists. Keep on commenting ![]() |
Author: | Ulrik [ Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:26 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed LatD revised army list structure |
Tiny-Tim wrote: The question might be that should the Cultist list be named as a Daemon Engine List and the PDF list renamed as the LatD list then we can concentrate on that list to get something workable? & I have no problems with Daemon Engines suddenly appearing on worlds, they are big places and you don't know for how long they have been there, being constructed, being worshipped. What I don't want to do is to end up having the Daemon Engines restricted to SM Cult lists. My ideal split would be to have a Cultist list, a Daemon Engine list (probably originating from a planet outside the Imperium) and variants of Traitor Guard (maybe covered by Bloody Hand etc already). If you think that a Chaos Cult can have the Daemon Engines, then a Daemon Engine list isn't really needed (but could be another cool variant down the line), and the Engines would stay in the Cult list. I think a Cultist list is the most important Lost and the Damned list - so much of the Imperium is about stopping the insidious corruption of Chaos that I think a good cultist list is the most iconic of the Imperium's foes. IMHO a cult would have imperial hardware, but not imperial organization. My suggestion for mixed formations is one way of showing it, but there could be others. A cult would have many IG units, but not anything resembling IG formations. For me it's totally fine if the diffferent formations means that the units are used less effectivly in-game. The Imperial Guard should be better at using their own units, after all. |
Author: | Tiny-Tim [ Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:36 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed LatD revised army list structure |
Ulrik wrote: IMHO a cult would have imperial hardware, but not imperial organization. My suggestion for mixed formations is one way of showing it, but there could be others. A cult would have many IG units, but not anything resembling IG formations. For me it's totally fine if the diffferent formations means that the units are used less effectivly in-game. The Imperial Guard should be better at using their own units, after all. Ah, so you are thinking along the lines of an Ork style army list. |
Author: | Ulrik [ Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:44 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed LatD revised army list structure |
Tiny-Tim wrote: Ah, so you are thinking along the lines of an Ork style army list. That's one possibility. It might be too flexible, if the list follows the orks with ten different base formations, or too limiting, if all formations start with 12 infantry units, or it might be a great idea. I was thinking more along the lines of having fixed formations, but with several unit types in the base formation to represent the ramshackle nature of the cult. |
Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:46 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed LatD revised army list structure |
So like: TRAITOR GUARD MOB - 350 pts Three Leman Russ, One Hydra, and eight Imperial Guard Infantry units. |
Author: | Ulrik [ Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:49 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed LatD revised army list structure |
Evil and Chaos wrote: So like: TRAITOR GUARD MOB - 350 pts Three Leman Russ, One Hydra, and eight Imperial Guard Infantry units. Yup. |
Author: | Irisado [ Tue May 01, 2012 9:36 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed LatD revised army list structure |
Tiny-Tim wrote: The way the lists are now split up are to allow current players to mainly keep their current lists but with more focus on one of the two aspects. Us oldies from the Space Marine era naturally do this anyway I suspect. Certainly for me, it's very rarely a fifty-fifty split, so the system you've implemented here seems unnecessary to me. Furthermore, new players could just decide to use the units which they can easily get their hands on, rendering both the split and percentage system somewhat redundant in my opinion. |
Author: | Tiny-Tim [ Wed May 02, 2012 8:42 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed LatD revised army list structure |
Irisado wrote: Us oldies from the Space Marine era naturally do this anyway I suspect. Certainly for me, it's very rarely a fifty-fifty split, so the system you've implemented here seems unnecessary to me. Furthermore, new players could just decide to use the units which they can easily get their hands on, rendering both the split and percentage system somewhat redundant in my opinion. And that is what we must remember that we are not just working on lists that are for us old guys but also so that people can get into the game as well. I would like to see more people playing LatD but most of the 'fun' units are too expensive for people to start off with without spending alot of time converting or ebaying. |
Author: | madd0ct0r [ Wed May 02, 2012 8:57 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed LatD revised army list structure |
true, but not i'm not how the new list structure addressess that. i'm not even sure you can address that IN the list structure. |
Author: | Irisado [ Tue May 08, 2012 1:21 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed LatD revised army list structure |
Tiny-Tim wrote: And that is what we must remember that we are not just working on lists that are for us old guys but also so that people can get into the game as well. I would like to see more people playing LatD but most of the 'fun' units are too expensive for people to start off with without spending alot of time converting or ebaying. That's a fair point, but how does dividing the list into two achieve this? The 'fun' units will still all only be available via e-bay no matter how you divide the list, so I don't see how a split gets us any further forward. If the overriding problem is one of internal balance, then my recommendation would be to keep the list structure as it is, but to tinker with some of the units which are perceived not to be good enough. |
Author: | wargame_insomniac [ Tue May 08, 2012 8:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Proposed LatD revised army list structure |
Irisado wrote: Tiny-Tim wrote: And that is what we must remember that we are not just working on lists that are for us old guys but also so that people can get into the game as well. I would like to see more people playing LatD but most of the 'fun' units are too expensive for people to start off with without spending alot of time converting or ebaying. That's a fair point, but how does dividing the list into two achieve this? The 'fun' units will still all only be available via e-bay no matter how you divide the list, so I don't see how a split gets us any further forward. If the overriding problem is one of internal balance, then my recommendation would be to keep the list structure as it is, but to tinker with some of the units which are perceived not to be good enough. That sounds good up to a point Irisado. Friends have said to me that they feel that many of the L&TD daemon engines are underpowered/overcosted and that would certainly help their attractiveness if they were tweaked. But only to a pont- that still does nt help with making list more streamlined and less bloated. Cheers James |
Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |