Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 1 of 3
  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

[Saim-Hann] Update, v6.1
Chroma
 Post subject: [Saim-Hann] Update, v6.1
PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 5:49 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
Did some overview and updates for the other Craftworlds and here's Saim-Hann:

Added:

Restored mounted Guardian Warhost and added Wraithguard and Wave Serpents upgrade (cuz red Wraithguard not only look cool, they go faster!!!  :D ).

Changed:

No more discounts on additional Jetbikes for the Wild Rider Warhosts.

Removed:

Nothing.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dave
 Post subject: [Saim-Hann] Update, v6.1
PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 6:14 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 11:25 pm
Posts: 9525
Location: Worcester, MA
I'm still going to argue for a separate stat line for the chieftain.  An invulnerable save and FF MW attack is too much in my opinion. Just a character upgrade with supreme commander and CC MW would be fine.

Also, I think the note in the Shining Spear Aspect Warhost should be moved to the Formation section.

Has there been any talk of moving the summon the Avatar ability to the Farsight special rule, or making it its own special rule? Saying in the Mounted Farseer data sheet that it counts as a Farseer just seems silly and redundant.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
semajnollissor
 Post subject: [Saim-Hann] Update, v6.1
PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 6:17 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm
Posts: 1673
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA

(Dave @ Oct. 02 2007,12:14)
QUOTE
Has there been any talk of moving the summon the Avatar ability to the Farsight special rule, or making it its own special rule? Saying in the Mounted Farseer data sheet that it counts as a Farseer just seems silly and redundant.

I think people do not want the warlock titan to have the ability to summon the Avatar.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Chroma
 Post subject: [Saim-Hann] Update, v6.1
PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 6:29 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

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

(Dave @ Oct. 02 2007,18:14)
QUOTE
I'm still going to argue for a separate stat line for the chieftain. ?An invulnerable save and FF MW attack is too much in my opinion. Just a character upgrade with supreme commander and CC MW would be fine.

Er... where are you seeing a MWFF attack for the Chieftan?  "Autarch" grants a +1MWCC attack and a "regular" +1FF attack.

I feel the invulerable save is fine, he/she's the head of the Clan, I'm sure they bolt a small holo-field or shield generator to their 'bike!  *laugh*  As well, they are probably *very* "dodgy", jinking and zipping around... all those would give a IS, in my opinion.

Also, I think the note in the Shining Spear Aspect Warhost should be moved to the Formation section.
Why do you think that?

Has there been any talk of moving the summon the Avatar ability to the Farsight special rule, or making it its own special rule? Saying in the Mounted Farseer data sheet that it counts as a Farseer just seems silly and redundant. Well, it's just their for the dreaded "rules lawyers".

And, yeah, farsight should be clarified... as it now reads, it actually does *nothing* for a Warlock Titan... go ahead, go read it... you'll laugh.  *laugh*

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dave
 Post subject: [Saim-Hann] Update, v6.1
PostPosted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 7:27 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 11:25 pm
Posts: 9525
Location: Worcester, MA

(Chroma @ Oct. 02 2007,13:29)
QUOTE
Er... where are you seeing a MWFF attack for the Chieftan?  "Autarch" grants a +1MWCC attack and a "regular" +1FF attack.

I feel the invulerable save is fine, he/she's the head of the Clan, I'm sure they bolt a small holo-field or shield generator to their 'bike!  *laugh*  As well, they are probably *very* "dodgy", jinking and zipping around... all those would give a IS, in my opinion.



In my typo ridden mind, that's where. MW aside, I still think the Chieftain can be tuned down though.


(Chroma @ Oct. 02 2007,13:29)
QUOTE
Why do you think that?


Mainly because it's more of a Note than a Type.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: [Saim-Hann] Update, v6.1
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 12:42 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

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

(Chroma @ Oct. 02 2007,17:29)
QUOTE
And, yeah, farsight should be clarified... as it now reads, it actually does *nothing* for a Warlock Titan... go ahead, go read it... you'll laugh.  *laugh*

Never fear, it has been clariifed, both in the handbook already, and in Neal's upcoming change documents.

Regarding Wraithguard they really shouldn't be allowed in the list I think. They are not characteristic of Sam-Hainn and  even if they are allowed they are should not be able to be transported given that they cannot be in the main Eldar list. That should change there first it is to be allowed, and that change has some severe balance problems that would need to be addressed first due to hit and run.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Charad
 Post subject: [Saim-Hann] Update, v6.1
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 6:16 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 8:59 pm
Posts: 1212
Location: Finland
That guardian unit is also a bit cheap, so six guardians cost only 50pts? (150pts for transport)

Chieftain is okay, he has good weapons and surely is best and craziest rider of his clan. :D

_________________
Rats Keep Running...

Dark Eldar Dracon
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Markconz
 Post subject: [Saim-Hann] Update, v6.1
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 6:39 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

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

(Charad @ Oct. 03 2007,05:16)
QUOTE
That guardian unit is also a bit cheap, so six guardians cost only 50pts? (150pts for transport)

I'm putting off having a serious look at the extra eldar lists until after the rules reviw, but yeah that sounds too cheap to me, by about 50 points.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
semajnollissor
 Post subject: [Saim-Hann] Update, v6.1
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 1:40 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm
Posts: 1673
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA

(Markconz @ Oct. 02 2007,18:42)
QUOTE
Regarding Wraithguard they really shouldn't be allowed in the list I think. They are not characteristic of Sam-Hainn and ?even if they are allowed they are should not be able to be transported given that they cannot be in the main Eldar list. That should change there first it is to be allowed, and that change has some severe balance problems that would need to be addressed first due to hit and run.

One man's opinion.

Wraithguard are only denied transportation in the BT list because that's the nature of that list. Wraithguard were certainly meant to be mounted in at least one of the varient lists, since they thought ahead and put them on the wave serpent transport list.

But, like I said in the other thread, let testing show what's needed. I have my doubts that a naked Guardian troupe would have much value on its own. It seems to me like a jetbike warhost would be more flexible and have the same basical battlefield role. Thats especially true if the guardian troupe is bumped up to 250 pts, the same cost as the warhost.

A pair of mounted wraithguard would be the quickest and easiest way of boosting the gaurdian troupe, unless you want to give them jetbikes or vypers as upgrades. Other than that, you'd have to make up some new rule for transporting weapons platforms. 200 pts may be too cheap of an upgrade, but that kind of thing will come out in the wash eventually.

Of course, I haven't played any games with this list yet, but hopefully that will change in the near future.

(As for using an autarch to represent a chieftain, I think that's a good idea. They basically have the same abilities and fill the same role, so why create a new entry? )
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
nealhunt
 Post subject: [Saim-Hann] Update, v6.1
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 3:33 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
Overall, that looks much better to me than any previous incarnation.

===

The Autarch/Chieftan probably needs a note that it's not really an Autarch, just that it's a convenient way to represent it.

I agree on the Guardian troupe cost.  6 Guardians at ~15 points each, + 3 WS at ~50 points each should be 225-250.

Not sure about the Wraithguard add-on for the troupe.  I could go either way.  I can see the argument for not including them at all, but that will be a a big, expensive formation at 425-450 points.

A compromise might be to replace some of the Guardians, so  something like "replace 2 Guardian units with Wraithguard Units and add one Wave Serpent". That's about +125 points.  You'd have 6 Guardians/3WS or 4 Guardians/2Wraithguard/4WS for 250/375.

_________________
Neal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Warphead
 Post subject: [Saim-Hann] Update, v6.1
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 9:58 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 10:12 pm
Posts: 98
Location: Germany
And, yeah, farsight should be clarified... as it now reads, it actually does *nothing* for a Warlock Titan... go ahead, go read it... you'll laugh.  *laugh*

We always play that the Farsight ability negates the -1 modifier while retaining the initiative. At least thats what the farsight rule says.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Chroma
 Post subject: [Saim-Hann] Update, v6.1
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 10:44 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

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

(Warphead @ Oct. 03 2007,21:58)
QUOTE
We always play that the Farsight ability negates the -1 modifier while retaining the initiative. At least thats what the farsight rule says.

In the actual Swordwind book, it refers to units "with a Farseer" benefitting from that, not a "unit with farsight", so, technically, the Warlock Titan couldn't benefit from an ability it had!  *laugh*

Fortunately Neal and Markconz have taken care of that in the rulebook update.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dave
 Post subject: [Saim-Hann] Update, v6.1
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2007 4:44 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 11:25 pm
Posts: 9525
Location: Worcester, MA

(nealhunt @ Oct. 03 2007,10:33)
QUOTE
A compromise might be to replace some of the Guardians, so  something like "replace 2 Guardian units with Wraithguard Units and add one Wave Serpent". That's about +125 points.  You'd have 6 Guardians/3WS or 4 Guardians/2Wraithguard/4WS for 250/375.

I'm in favor of this compromise.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Chroma
 Post subject: [Saim-Hann] Update, v6.1
PostPosted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 4:26 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

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

(Dave @ Oct. 04 2007,16:44)
QUOTE

(nealhunt @ Oct. 03 2007,10:33)
QUOTE
A compromise might be to replace some of the Guardians, so ?something like "replace 2 Guardian units with Wraithguard Units and add one Wave Serpent". That's about +125 points. ?You'd have 6 Guardians/3WS or 4 Guardians/2Wraithguard/4WS for 250/375.

I'm in favor of this compromise.

Yeah, that should be doable, I'll look to add it in the next iteration.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
semajnollissor
 Post subject: [Saim-Hann] Update, v6.1
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 6:06 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm
Posts: 1673
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA
Regarding mounted farseers, since models exist for farseers on vypers, but the vypers obviously no longer have their main weapon, could we go ahead and make the mounted farseer a unit, instead of a character?

I was thinking:
Infantry, 35cm, 4+ 4+ 5+
shuriken catapults 15cm small arms
witch blades b/c assault, +1A MW
Skimmer, mounted, Inv. Save, Farsight, Commander

That stat line could represent a farseer and 1-2 warlock on jetbikes, or a single Farseer on a vyper "chariot." The LV nature of a "normal" Vyper could just be neglected (or you could argue that some sort of equipment - rune shields, scythes, vectored engines, etc - mean it would be better treated as infantry instead of a LV).

Basically, wouldn't a single unit be easier to playtest than a character upgrade to two different units?

[The main reason I ask is that I'd like to use my Vyper farseers as jetbike farseers, so I don't have to convert any, but I don't want to deal with any WYSIWYG problems in a tourney setting.]
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 1 of 3
  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 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

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net