batrep: 3150 IG vs 3000 Tsons |
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: batrep: 3150 IG vs 3000 Tsons  Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 8:37 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
NH,
I don't keep up with the Tsons list developments. So I appoligize for not knowing the specific changes. I'll have to start keeping up with them because I think the list is pretty neat.
I wish we would've had that info. I'll try to get up to speed on that.
Regards to the Tsons army - I'm not 100% on the amount of units in each formation, but I'm pretty sure I'm close. My opponent created the list - not me. I was playing IG. example: he may have had 8 towers and not 9, but he kept telling me about the sacred Tz number... so, perhaps that is somehow ingrained in my brain. 
The towers seemed like there were quite a few in the formation for an army that I really didn't expect to be heavy armor centric. On the other hand, they were a really neat formation. Skimming, fearless, and invulnerable save if I recall right - but no reinforced. The three shorter ranged leman cannons + long range macro hit was pretty effective. Ignoring terrain made them quite manouverable where comparable lemans would've had to drive around quite a bit.
As the adversary, although they were increadibly destructive, they were a blessing to me. They were the only thing that didn't have reinforced armor in the army! So although they packing a lot of heat for what I thought would cost him more points per model and they were hard to see and get lines too - once I could actually see them, I could hope to do some damage to them. Ironically, the Tsons player said it was the only formation he wasn't keen on because they didn't have reinforced armor - I couldn't help but LOL at that one. I can't pass judgement on the army only playing against it once - these things were slow, but really effective.
The palace was pretty tough - for the same reasons other things were. I hate to pass judgement on the army after only one game.
Since the points were apparently all screwed up - it's too hard for me to tell if it's over the top or not.
My lasting impression is - I didn't have fun in the game. The fearless + RA 4+ made it very frustrating army to play against.
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
nealhunt
|
Post subject: batrep: 3150 IG vs 3000 Tsons Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 9:05 pm |
|
| Purestrain |
 |
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
Sorry if that last post was unduly harsh. It's been one of those days, so I'm grumpy.
The fun factor been a concern for me since my first playtest game. Shooting and shooting and shooting and having little effect is quite frustrating (although it might not be as frustrating as playing Eldar  )
The army as a whole is pretty one-dimensional. It's basically made up of 2 parts - slow infantry and slow fire support, with lots of RA scattered around. It's a race to see if the enemy can dispose of the fire support in time to deal with the assault troops coming across the board.
I can't see much way of adding variety without breaking from the background. I've already stretched it just about as much as possible without getting full on into the old Rogue Trader style Tzeentch forces.
My experiences with the Towers has been much as you described. They pack a huge amount of firepower but aren't very tough. I typically find that they spend a large amount of time heavily suppressed because they are a high priority target.
I haven't had a chance to test it yet, but I'm actually also concerned about a force that's all infantry and air. The horde of troops shambles across the board while the air cover is basically just a vehicle for placing BMs for the assaults. Of course, that's still just a variation on the horde/fire support style.
I actually had a long discussion with Corey, the Necron Champion, about the all-RA aspect. Early versions of the Necron list had much in common - plodding, RA infantry. Unfortunately, we really didn't touch on anything that would help the TSons much.
It's probably not hard to balance with respect to win/loss ratios, but it's just sort of bleh on game experience.
Any input is definitely welcomed, especially if it can be used to put in some variation in play style. Also, if you have any responses to the commentary in the margins of the list, definitely post it.
==
If you want an electronic copy of the list with the changes integrated, just let me know.
_________________
Neal
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: batrep: 3150 IG vs 3000 Tsons Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 9:32 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
|
I'd definitely like a copy of the most up to date list with the changes. We'd most definitely give it a go.
If you are going to add the daemon summoning changes in the near future, I can wait for that one.
Feel free to send along in email when ready.
Thanks,
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
nealhunt
|
Post subject: batrep: 3150 IG vs 3000 Tsons Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 10:08 pm |
|
| Purestrain |
|
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
Sure, but I need your email address. You can reach me at:
nealhunt@yahoo.com
or
neal.e.hunt@vanderbilt.edu
===
BTW, I didn't mention in the infantry/air version that there would be no vehicles of any type, just a huge garrison of 4+RA infantry slogging across the board. All AT capacity would be wasted. It seems pretty nasty in concept.
_________________
Neal
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: batrep: 3150 IG vs 3000 Tsons Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:32 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
|
NH,
Sorry, I figured you would grab it from my profile or something... just sent you an email with my info.
Regards to the all infantry with air support, it sounds really ugly. I can imagine many lists that would mess up.
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
nealhunt
|
Post subject: batrep: 3150 IG vs 3000 Tsons Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2005 2:19 pm |
|
| Purestrain |
|
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
|
Sorry. I just looked for the email icon. I didn't even think of going for the profile.
Got your email. I'll be merging the summoning rules sometime this week.
_________________
Neal
|
|
| Top |
|
|
