Tactical Command | View topic - Tired of Arguement

Page 1 of 4

[ 49 posts ]

Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

View unanswered posts | View active topics View unread posts | View new posts | View your posts

Tired of Arguement

MC23

Post subject: Tired of Arguement

Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 4:25 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:27 am
Posts: 174

Play Ulthwe as Strategy 4!

No more 5. I'm tired of the arguemnts and it is messing up any other balance issues I potentially see Ulthwe.

I'll change it with the next list.

_________________
I am MC23

Top

Chroma

Post subject: Tired of Arguement

Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 5:08 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

Quote (MC23 @ 04 Feb. 2006 (15:25))

Play Ulthwe as Strategy 4!

No more 5. I'm tired of the arguemnts and it is messing up any other balance issues I potentially see Ulthwe.

I'll change it with the next list.

Well, I gotta say that sucks as a solution.

Why not just try the 10% increase for a bit, just to the base Warhosts and Troupes, not the additions/upgrades? ?To me, the SR5 is one of the main draws of the list, without it, I'll just play Alaitoc if I want a Guardian army with the medium sized Aspect Troupes or Biel-Tan if I want lots of Aspects. ?It makes Ulthw? the poorest option then as they have no real advantage that makes them stand out to the other Eldar lists.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Top

Markconz

Post subject: Tired of Arguement

Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 12:46 pm

Purestrain

Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:43 pm
Posts: 7925
Location: New Zealand

Quote (Chroma @ 04 Feb. 2006 (15:08))

Quote (MC23 @ 04 Feb. 2006 (15:25))

Play Ulthwe as Strategy 4!

No more 5. I'm tired of the arguemnts and it is messing up any other balance issues I potentially see Ulthwe.

I'll change it with the next list.

1+ guardian formations, and a seer council instead of the awful autarch are good reasons to play Ulthwe. SR 5 I have always found to be over the top. Also the 4 strong aspects do have a role all of their own IMO. Hawks and Reapers are especially useful in these numbers.

I think this MC23 has the right idea on this one. Leave the SR5 for the marines, (they need to have something!)

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/

Top

Chroma

Post subject: Tired of Arguement

Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 3:06 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

Quote (Markconz @ 05 Feb. 2006 (11:46))

SR 5 I have always found to be over the top.

The only reason it seems to be over the top is that they aren't paying for it. ?They have all the Eldar special rules, plus more, for the same price, that is the *only* issue with it.

The playtesting I have done here has shown that to be about a 10% advantage, simple as that. ?It's an easy and elegant solution and basically solves the problem, so I don't understand the resistance to it.

It is entirely appropriate for Ulthw? to have SR5, with their constant scrying and farseeing, just as it is entirely appropriate for Saim-Hann to have SR3 to represent their wildness. ?It adds character and variation between the lists beyond just unit organization and I, for one, think that's really cool and something missing in other "variant" lists.

Basically every Ulthw? player I know (two others... *laugh*, but I get this feeling from most board members I see writing about it, or playing against Ulthw?) feel there is something a little "over the top" with Ulthw?. ?When, through playtesting, you find things are like that you either change stats or change points; to keep the character of Ulthw?, why not just try changing points?

Give it a try! ?Convert a couple of your Ulthw? armies to the following point values, I've done it, and I tend to lose a formation or two and might be off by 5-10 points, which means less activations to balance the better SR. ?

All "upgrade" point values remain the same.

Ulthw? Armylist

Avatar ?- 0 points

0-1 Wraithgate - 55 points

0-1 Seer Council - 65 points

Warhosts

Guardian Warhost - 165 points

Black Guardian Warhost ?- 225 points

Troupes

Aspect Warrior Troupe - 165 points

Ranger Troupe - 30 points per Ranger

War Walker Troupe - 225 points

Windrider Troupe - 225 points

Falcon Troupe - 275 points

Fire Prism Troupe - 275 points

Nightspinner Troupe - 200 points

Engine of Vaul - 275 points

Spacecraft, Titans, and Aircraft

0-1 Eldar Spacecraft: Wraithship - 165 points, Dragonship - 325 points

0-1 Warlock Titan - 925 points

Phanton Titan - 825 points

Revenant Titans - 725 points

Night Wings - 325 points

Phoenix Bombers - 450 points

Vampire Raider - 225 points

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Top

Chroma

Post subject: Tired of Arguement

Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 3:25 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

Quote (Markconz @ 05 Feb. 2006 (11:46))

Well, most of the other Eldar variant lists can get 4-6 unit Aspect Troupes and more of them as well, so that's not really an advantage for them.

I *do* like the Black Guardians, though some dislike the lack of Wraith-units, I like the "Strike Force" feel of the formation.

As to the Seer Council, yes, they're great, but undercosted at 50 points.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Top

Fuzzymiles

Post subject: Tired of Arguement

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:45 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 6:16 pm
Posts: 19

Hi all,

I have not posted here before, but I read the forums quite often, and the Ulthwe list is the one I have chosen to play. ?I will freely admit that the primary reason I chose to play the Ulthwe is that the SR 5 is something I very much like. ?I agree that the Eldar as a whole need some changes. ?(I personally believe that Revenants as a formation need to cost more.) ?But the overall change to every points cost in the army doesn't make this a variant, it makes it an entirely new list. ?I don't know what a good solution is, but if you make Ulthwe SR 4 with smaller Aspect warrior squads, then there is honestly no reason to take Ulthwe. ?Sure we get the Spirit Seer and the Black Guardian Squad, but the Black Guardians are more expensive and IMO they are not that much improved over basic Guardian Warhosts. ?My personal favorite idea I have seen so far is to make the Seer Council cost 100 points and tie the SR 5 to having the Seer Council on the table. ?Sure, the most important reason for SR 5 is the first turn and the setup rolls, but if your enemy REALLY wants the initiative back blast the Supreme Commander of the army. ?And while, yes, the plans are in motion already, it is also a matter of gameplay. ?In this instance, personally, I think it is better to increase the Seer Council's Points and tie the SR 5 specifically to that unit.

Fuzzymiles

Top

Tiny-Tim

Post subject: Tired of Arguement

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 3:10 pm

Hybrid

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:32 pm
Posts: 4893
Location: North Yorkshire

I must have really missed something here.

MC23, I thought that you had submitted the list to JJ for approval?

I also thought that SR 5 was one of the original points that JJ wanted in the list. I felt that the increase cost for BG and the reduction in their upgrades made for a nice balance, but I am probably in the minority here.

Tiny

_________________
_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk - home of the UK Epic tournament scene
NetEA NetERC Xenos Lists Chair
NetEA Ork + Feral Ork + Speed Freak Champion

Top

yme-loc

Post subject: Tired of Arguement

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 5:45 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 4:58 pm
Posts: 599

Quote (MC23 @ 04 Feb. 2006 (15:25))

Play Ulthwe as Strategy 4!

No more 5. I'm tired of the arguemnts and it is messing up any other balance issues I potentially see Ulthwe.

I'll change it with the next list.

Dont like to critisise, and although like everyone I apreciate all the hard work you do for the eldar lists, but this sort of blanket "I dont like the way this discussion is going" isn't really very constructive especially considering the rather small and fragile nature of the epic playtesting comunity.

In most eldar players opinion the ulthwe list is overpowered because of the strat 5 - but this unfortunately is also one of the things that defines ulthwe, now finding a solution to this problem might not be easy and it may also not be one you wanted personally to focus time on. But it seems to me to be an important enough issue to warrent a little more work - and if no solution is possible then perhaps strat 4 will be the only solution.

_________________
Epic UK - Improving and Enhancing Epic Gaming in the UK
[url]http://epic-uk.co.uk/wp[/url]

Top

Tactica

Post subject: Tired of Arguement

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 7:51 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241

MC23,

I think we are talking about one of the important problems here, but I"m not sure the solution is the right answer.

I don't play Eldar, I play Tau and IG primarily. I play against Eldar a lot though... On occasion, I've borrowed a list and fielded the swordwind eldar. SO, this is for the most part - an opponent of the Eldar's perspective.

I do think there are more issues with the Eldar than just the Ulthwe's Strat 5... in the Ulthwe list though, the Strat 5 is the guiding beast of burden. So to that end...

1) I don't think the Ulthwe are paying for the Strat 5 when compared to other lists. The unit prices just don't reflect it.

2) I do think Ulthwe craftworld lists have design concept to support the Strat 5 (as much as I hate admitting that).

3) I do think there's a point increase across the board solution to be considered - which would satisfy both sides of this issue.

This perhaps is a long way of saying I agree with Chroma on this one.

Cheers,

_________________
Rob

Top

nealhunt

Post subject: Tired of Arguement

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 10:49 pm

Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA

SR in general is a minor consideration. A difference of 1 in SR for an army that is already relatively high on SR values is minimal.

Win % for SR4 v SR5
===============
v SR1: 83.3% v 91.6%
v SR2: 72.2% v 83.3%
v SR3: 58.3% v 72.2%
v SR4: 41.6% v 58.3%
v SR5: 27.7% v 41.6%

Against most armies, that's...less than 1 strategy win per game. In fact, it comes out to about 1 win every other game. Heck, if you throw out first turn where activation count tends to have more effect than who wins the strategy roll, it only has an appreciable effect every third game.

I realize there are some minor other advantages based on setup, but someone is going to have to explain to me in great detail how 1 strategy roll every other game can possibly be the source of any appreciable imbalance.

The only think I can see is that it has some bizarrely disproportionate psychological effect based on the "but it's just better for the same price" factor. I understand the psychological impact of that, but that doesn't mean it is real.

The difference is like saying that a 100cm range is better than a 90cm range. Sure it is. No possible way to dispute that it is not. But what is the real in-game difference? Nothing discernible in nearly all games.

If there is a problem in the balance of the Ulthwe list, I submit that it is due to imbalance in the Biel Tan list from which it is derived and has simply carried over and has absolutely nothing to do with SR5.

_________________
Neal

Top

Chroma

Post subject: Tired of Arguement

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 10:59 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

Quote (nealhunt @ 06 Feb. 2006 (21:49))

SR in general is a minor consideration. ?A difference of 1 in SR for an army that is already relatively high on SR values is minimal.

Which is why I suggest a minor point increase of 10%, to compensate for the minor advantage. In basically all my examples it winds up being the cost of one formation from my army, so that slight decrease in activations is the balance, and I don't know how anyone can argue against it. SR5 *is* better than SR4.

It allows the Ulthw? player to dictate the terms of setup against all armies except Marines, against which it is 50/50. Being able to always pick sides (and whether long or corner), setup objectives, garrisons, and spaceships first is an advantage.

What's so bad about making the army pay for it? Why is there such resistance to the idea? I just can't understand nor figure that out. *Especially* when it's so easy to do!

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Top

code_ronin

Post subject: Tired of Arguement

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 11:04 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:51 pm
Posts: 127

Quote (nealhunt @ 06 Feb. 2006 (21:49))

The difference is like saying that a 100cm range is better than a 90cm range. ?Sure it is. ?No possible way to dispute that it is not. ?But what is the real in-game difference? ?Nothing discernible in nearly all games.

If there is a problem in the balance of the Ulthwe list, I submit that it is due to imbalance in the Biel Tan list from which it is derived and has simply carried over and has absolutely nothing to do with SR5.

Well said. I agree completely. I think most complaints about the Saim-Hann derive from the abilities gained from the basic list (i.e. Jetbike stats, Farseer 'Farsight', and 'Spirit Stones').

Then again, we have pretty much taken to using 2+ iniative for the Wind Rider Hosts.

_________________
Have keyboard, will travel.

Top

code_ronin

Post subject: Tired of Arguement

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 11:11 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:51 pm
Posts: 127

Quote (Chroma @ 06 Feb. 2006 (21:59))

What's so bad about making the army pay for it? ?Why is there such resistance to the idea? ?I just can't understand nor figure that out. ?*Especially* when it's so easy to do!

I'm not sure who you are referring to, as most people seem to agree with the idea of the 10% point increase you've suggested.

I also agree with the (slight) point increase for Saim-Hann's Wind Riders, even with the roll-back to Initiative 2+.

I am against taking away those things which truly define a craftworld list, rather than making it a slightly different version of a generic craftworld list. B-T has Aspect Hosts, Ulthewe has the strategy rating, Seer Council, and Black Guardians, S-H the hordes of Jetbikes, but fewer other choices, etc.

Vive le difference!

_________________
Have keyboard, will travel.

Top

nealhunt

Post subject: Tired of Arguement

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 11:18 pm

Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA

What's so bad about making the army pay for it? Why is there such resistance to the idea?

I don't have a problem with paying for it if you can demonstrate that the cost is reasonable. I wouldn't put the net difference between SR4 and SR5 equal to 5%, much less 10%.

In all the threads that have discussed this, despite repeated requests to do so, not one single person has ever laid out in detail to what extent they think +1SR affects the game. The plaintive cry has just been "but it's better" without any quantitative discussion. Without some detailed reasoning, that holds no water, just like the 90cm v 100cm example I posted above.

So, again, if you really feel that 10% is justified based solely on SR5, please explain why.

_________________
Neal

Top

Chroma

Post subject: Tired of Arguement

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 11:30 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada

Quote (nealhunt @ 06 Feb. 2006 (22:18))

In all the threads that have discussed this, despite repeated requests to do so, not one single person has ever laid out in detail to what extent they think +1SR affects the game. ?The plaintive cry has just been "but it's better" without any quantitative discussion. ?Without some detailed reasoning, that holds no water, just like the 90cm v 100cm example I posted above.

Well, please take a look at my Alaitoc vs Ulthw? BatRep which was specifically done to show this:

http://www.epic40k.co.uk/epicomm....;t=6018

Or my Tau vs Ulthw? BatReps that prompted Dobbsy's initial complaint:

http://www.epic40k.co.uk/epicomm....;t=5680

http://www.epic40k.co.uk/epicomm....;t=5721

Or the fact that I've been playing Ulthw? with a 10% handicap for the past three months resulting in a lot closer games than the usual Ulthw? domination. ?(Okay, I'm the best Eldar player in my area, but even when I take the other side and let people use my Ulthw?, they kick major butt.)

Being more likely to go first is a great advantage to Eldar, particularly when they can open up with a devastating triple-activation which can eviscerate an opponent.

I listed the points about table set up as well. ?How many more examples do you need?

Try some games with the 10% point increase against Eldar or anyone else, specifically try it *without* Revenants as the increase in activations by not taking them is significant as well (3 Jetbike Troupes and a Wraithgate for essentially the same cost, for example!).

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Top

Print view

Previous topic | Next topic

Page 1 of 4

[ 49 posts ]

Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:

Tired of Arguement

Who is online