| Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
|
|
Now we've actually played the game (And I had a chance to discuss some of your points in person), how do you feel it went?
IIRC your line about Leman Russ costing is a new comment.
65-70
65-66.6 actually, never as high as 70.
It's worth remembering that when you pay 65pts, you get one Vanquisher for FREE. IMHO that is more broken than any of the Leman Russ points costs in the DK list.
For posterity, here's my original reply from our club's forum:
First thing, I would say there are just too many different units available to the list.
IIRC the list has less units than the regular IG list; The major area where it has more choice is in Super-Heavy tanks, and this is largely only due to the fact that when Epic was released, SG and FW were having a spat, and SG refused to support any of the FW models in the official rules.
Thus we ended up with the terrible 'collectors' pages in the rulebook, with badly-thought out stats and no points costs, and a dearth of 'official' unit types.
There's nothing inherently unbalancing about the unit selection present in this army list, as ~50 playtest games have shown the list to be underpowered if anything.
Centaurs - not sure if I'm reading this right, but I think it says 8 centaurs for 50 points.
Check their armour save, and the fact that they're light vehicles. Cool
One or two lost vehicles essentially cripples a Storm Trooper formation for a full turn, potentially a full game?
Hydra platforms - seem underpriced
Note that they're 'light vehicles' rather than armoured vehicles, which means you can shoot them with AP weapons as well as AT.
Death Riders - there's no extra cost on these for their scouting ability. Maybe consider limiting to 1 formation per army if you want to maintain this costing.
The Death Rider platoon (6 bases) can scout, but there's no extra cost because they have scout in the core rule book for the same points cost?
The Death Rider company cannot scout, so they recieve a small points discount (But note that amazing 6+ save, heh).
Gorgons - I'm with Hena, these are definitely underpriced
They're death traps with popguns? the first time you destroy one (And simultaniously kill ~8 stands of infantry) you'll learn that they're definitely not underpriced.
Note as well the high initial points cost for the infantry companies.
It's good to remember that Hena (From the Tactical Command forum) tends to stick to his beliefs about rules balance even when proven wrong repeatedly; I'll say it again for clarity, the Death Korps list has been repeatedly shown to be slightly underpowered.
Now I don't mind that, because my ethos of army development is to start underpowered and slowly power up until its win/loss ratio is acceptable?
The sheer ammount of 6+ save units in this army list (As opposed to 4+ re-rollable saves) compared with a comparative lack of slots available for artillery means that the Death Korps list is a heck of a lot less powerful than the Siegemasters list? because even though the Siegemasters list has less unit types, they're also consistantly underpriced and overpowered across the board (The Siegemasters are second only to the Eldar in the ammount of nerfs they took in the 2008 handbook), which led to them being probably the most overpowered army in Epic when first released.
Warhound - maybe adjust this for the revised costing, not sure what your policy is here
The Mossino Campaign was put out before the 2008 handbook was finalised? assume that the handbook's points cost and stat modifications take priority (For example Demolisher cannons regained Ignore Cover late in the process, which also is not represented in the current DK list).
Thudd guns, mortars and all the platforms should have a cc of nil and an armour of nil. These units are sitting ducks. Which is why they should generally be behind gun emplacements. I don't think they deserve to have a save. I think a close combat roll makes little sense either.
IIRC the saving throw of a Thudd gun is the same as it is in the Swordwind book (No saving throw at all).
The only difference in stats should be that instead of
having no CC attack, they can make one on a 6+, as they are crewed by Death Korps infantry (Who are better at CC than normal guardsmen).
For the stationary platforms? well they are 'light vehicles'? that puts them in the same armour class as a Sentinel.
In 40k, the armour stats of a stationary basilisk platform are decently superior to that of a Sentinel, I don't see why the Sentinel should get a 6+ save in Epic, yet the platforms (Which are supposed to have better armour) should be given no save at all?
Hydra platform, maybe adjust down the AP? This gun is designed primarily to take down aircraft.
The stats of the Hydra's platform's gun are taken directly from the Chimera-borne Hydra from the core rulebook.
Remember that it's immobile unless I also use some trojan transports, and consequentially likely will never shoot at anything except aircraft.
I'd love it if you could post this over on Tactical Command when you can, so the locals there can weigh in with their thoughts.
Our game ended in a 2-0 victory to me. We chatted after the game and I pointed out an easy way that Nick could have forced a turn 4, and an easy victory thereafter (I had only two combat effective formations remaining*** plus 3 basilisks, whilst he had an unscathed Gargant with 2 power fields remaining, plus a decent chunk of his army that was likely to pass its rally rolls, two fighter bommers and a landa...)
As I said on the evening, I think it was tactical error on your part that lost you the game, because you sustained fire with your Gargant on the last turn instead of moving fowards to stop me from claiming 'They Shall Not Pass'.
*** A Death Rider company, perched right in LOS of his Gargant, and a Storm Trooper platoon in a Gorgon, again in front of his Gargant. 
|
|
