| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Gargant Bigmob 3.03 http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=83&t=21729 |
Page 1 of 3 |
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Mon Nov 07, 2011 3:18 pm ] | ||
| Post subject: | Gargant Bigmob 3.03 | ||
Latest version of the Gargant Bigmob list. Changes: Modified composition and cost of warband formation. Allowed more upgrades. Reduced shots on the gatling kannon. In addition, feel free to test: Stompas at +75 pts each as Upgrades.
|
|||
| Author: | Reedar [ Mon Nov 07, 2011 8:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gargant Bigmob 3.03 |
Cheers E&C, the revisions look good mate. |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Mon Nov 07, 2011 9:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gargant Bigmob 3.03 |
Cool. I'd hope the list can go stable for testing for a while now. |
|
| Author: | alansa [ Mon Nov 21, 2011 12:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gargant Bigmob 3.03 |
Ok, so I gave the Gargant list a quick run around vs Carlos and his Knights http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=21265&start=15 so here's my battle report I've decided to make a go with the Mega Gargant, here's my list Mega Gargant 1050 Gargant 650 2 Suoa Guns and a Supa Zzap Supa Stompa with Kombat 'Ammer 2 Loota warbands using big guns, one upgraded to a Supa ZZap 3 Loota warbands using big guns So the Mega Gargant obviously dominating the list construction - I wanted to get as many activations as possible so I needed to take the Gargant in order to qualify for 3 more formations giving me a total of 8 in all. To make it fit into 300 points most of the extra formations would have to be the cheap loota warbands. I wanted the supa stompa, though could have dropped it and used another warband instead I opted not to take aircraft, since I was low on formations on the ground already. So the only aircover came from the weirdboy tower on the mega gargant - could have done with more but the weirdboy was most welcome. After all that I had 100 points left so I chose to upgrade two big guns. A possiblity would have been to take Kans instead of big guns in the warbands, though I don't have many Kans models. I suppose I could have used Dreads as stand-ins but I prefer wysiwyg wherever possible I place my blitz roughly in the centere of my edge of the table and two objectives right on the centre line (it's a slow army this) 30 cm apart carlos placed his blitz off centre and objectives in my half around about on the half way line again and right on the table edge. Fairly predictable objective placement I think you'll agree I placed my MG centrally flanked by G and SS. A warband in some ruins just infront of the blitz, another not far away both on OW and another in some ruins on the right flank near to the objective there. Other warbands near to the gargants. The Knights where spread in a long line across the table, with 2 of his three artillery on his blitz. His Baron and Warhound where place on his left, roughly out harms way of the MG Turn 1 lack of activations and speed meant I had little to shoot at before my activations ran out, even with the ultra long range weaponry on the MG, allowing carlos to bring his knights into position witha fair degree of safety. The beginning of the turn saw carlos dropping BMs on me from his 3 cheapy cheap arty batteries and the Double info gunned warhound swept around the flank buring the warband in the ruins near the objective on my fair left with ease. I doubled my Gargants forward in the general direction of the centre objectives and the stompa to try and stand in the way of the warhound on the right flank. A few potshots from my MG and one from my Stomp at the advanced warhound was about as much as I could manage. Turn 2 Saw Carlos winning the initiive doing a classic double whammy (move shoot retain assault with shooters in support) against my gargant, doing some damage and breaking it. The MG double forward again towards these knights (so not directly towards the centre objectives) shot at some knights which had not yet activated about 60cm away, doing no damage at all (the extra blast markers where welcom though), the barrage was innafective when doubling and shooting at a formation with only a few units and the *two* Supa ZZaps where deflected by the knight shields. Now I retained with a warband to assault the knights closeby with my carefully position MG in support. But they failed to obey orders! (Even with a reroll) dam!) My right flank was then completely swept aside by the warhound and knights, as the warhound made it's speedy progress round towards it's goal, my blitz. Thunderbolts provided air support for this, one was brought down on the way out by the weirdboy. Turn 3 Carlos wins the initiative again, breaks my Gargant on the left again (after it had rallied) - though a couple of knights die in the process (hurray!) My MG stepped forawrd towards the objectives towards the centre, unloading everything including my Mega Missiles at the knights there - Nothing! Seeing that the warhound was making steady progress towards my blitz I should have brought a nearby formation back towards my blitz to support things there, but the game looked well and truly up so I decided to use this warband instead to assault the nights at the centre using the MG in support. It was a bit of a stretch though to say the least, one boy was left in range to stop the assault stalling and after the counter charges only one knight was left in range of the MG, it was subsequently destroyed (damn right), but needless to say I still lost the assult. The warhound completed it's run towards my blitz and game over 2-0 In all I think I destroyed 3 Knights and 1 Thurnderhawk - though none of my Gargants or Supa Stompa where destroyed, by the end of the Game pretty much only my MG remained unbroken. I sound whipping from the knights I would say! |
|
| Author: | nealhunt [ Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gargant Bigmob 3.03 |
Oddboyz: I'd let them be standard Oddboyz instead of trying to work in the kustom upgrades. They're only on one formation, the Lootaz, and have pretty limited deployment options within that formation - no gunwagonz and 0-1 Gunforts, which cannot transport the formation (meaning mixed AV/WE transport). I know the plan is to be "mekky" but I can't see the upgrades being used much on the infantry formations and it introduces a lot of potentially weird situations (like an infantry-mounted Snappa). |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Mon Nov 21, 2011 4:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gargant Bigmob 3.03 |
Thanks for the report Alansa. Any general thoughts? nealhunt wrote: Oddboyz: I'd let them be standard Oddboyz instead of trying to work in the kustom upgrades. They're only on one formation, the Lootaz, and have pretty limited deployment options within that formation - no gunwagonz and 0-1 Gunforts, which cannot transport the formation (meaning mixed AV/WE transport). 1 Battlefortress + 1 Flakkwagon would let you transport the formation, albeit with mixed AV/WE (I'd try and hide the Flak behind the WE). Alternatively, 4 Battlewagons lets you transport the formation, that's the same as the 4 required to transport a Ghazgul Warband. Alternatively again, they could ride inside a Gargant with the Transporta Upgrade. They could also garrison. Quote: I know the plan is to be "mekky" but I can't see the upgrades being used much on the infantry formations and it introduces a lot of potentially weird situations (like an infantry-mounted Snappa). What's wrong with Infantry Snappas? :-P It doesn't change the CC rating like the Mega Choppa, so it should balance out? I could see the CC upgrades being used on mounted Warbands, and the shooty upgrades being used on garrisoned/overwatch warbands; A Zzap or Soopagun with an attached Wyrdboy Tower starting the game garrisoned on overwatch strikes me as very attractive. |
|
| Author: | nealhunt [ Mon Nov 21, 2011 6:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gargant Bigmob 3.03 |
Sorry. "Deployment" was a bad term. I was referring to the unit the Oddboyz are attached to. Neither Battlewagons nor Battlefortresses can have Oddboyz attached to them. No Gunwagonz in the formation, so that's not an option. If you attach one to a Gunfort, that is 0-1 so you can't buy enough fortress transport for the formation. |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Mon Nov 21, 2011 6:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gargant Bigmob 3.03 |
Ah yes. That was an intentional limitation, to avoid having them taken too much. Could put Gunwagons back in as Warband upgrades, I suppose? And make Gunfortresses 0-2 instead of 0-1? Was thinking about making the Power Field type Oddboy available to Battlefortresses too. |
|
| Author: | alansa [ Mon Nov 21, 2011 6:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gargant Bigmob 3.03 |
General thoughts Well I always new it would be a tough call to get a megagargant based army to work due to the massive number of activations it soaks up. This compounded by the fact that I needed a second gargant to get more than 4 activations total! Lack of speed is a massive factor - I'd have liked to have mechanised at least two formations - maybe I will do next time, sacrificing a warband to do so. i'd say a drop rock or krooza for teleporting is going to be pretty essential for this list - i'll try it for my MegaGargant army too We nerfed the Mega Gargant plenty to bring it's price down - i'd like to see the price dropped even more to say 950 points, but that's really pushing it I think. I can see a Mega Gargant list being able to score draws, but I think it'll be tough to get wins - we'll see |
|
| Author: | carlos [ Mon Nov 21, 2011 8:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gargant Bigmob 3.03 |
Felt odd at 3k and more suitable for 4k in my opinion. The stuff besides the gargants was very squishy and unfortunately too slow. Mechanizing or using a landa might help, but once I had it flat-footed in middle 2nd turn it had a really hard time getting back into position (the army in general, not just the mega-g). Taking it to 950 pts and keeping it at DC 16 is going to be tough. I can see the mega-g and the great-g costing roughly the same but specializing in different things with the mega-g not having RA but having a lot of DC and powerfields. |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Mon Nov 21, 2011 9:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gargant Bigmob 3.03 |
It's probably worth noting that in terms of hits required to kill it, the Mega Gargant needs 32 hits against the hull to kill, whilst the Great Gargant actually needs 48 hits. So it's easier to kill with standard AT guns, but has a good deal more firepower. TK weapons give the benefit to the Mega Gargant though of course as it's the greater number of DC that's more important there. I could see its price dropped in time if testing proves it underpowered. |
|
| Author: | madd0ct0r [ Tue Nov 22, 2011 12:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gargant Bigmob 3.03 |
hmmm, noted |
|
| Author: | alansa [ Tue Nov 22, 2011 11:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gargant Bigmob 3.03 |
It isn't underpowered in of itself - it is the simple fact that it costs such much that makes it worth less! |
|
| Author: | alansa [ Tue Nov 22, 2011 11:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gargant Bigmob 3.03 |
carlos wrote: Felt odd at 3k and more suitable for 4k in my opinion. even at 4k a sensible person would be two 500 pt formations or three 333pt formations, rather than 1 1000pt one. I think the max formation limit is 850 no matter the army limit - but that's just my pet theory |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Tue Nov 22, 2011 11:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Gargant Bigmob 3.03 |
If it keeps losing games then we can up its points. I prefer to start underpowered and work upwards slowly. |
|
| Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|
