zombocom:
Quote:
Just don't call them taruntulas, mostly because it'll contrast with other lists likely to use the more modern version like the elysians.
"tracked tarantula" or "support platform" or something would be fine.
They're called Support Weapons in the list. Tarantulas are mentioned as being Support Weapons in the flavor text.
E&C:
Quote:
Here are a few relevant quotes from Imperial Armour on the subject of Tarantulas:
"Many veterans refer to sentry guns as "Tarantulas"; the origins of this name are unknown.
Which, by itself, could easily point to them being different than the original Tarantula. Clearly, they're named for their similarity to the original, which is only infrequently deployed in the current era.
Also, the quotes you cite do not necessarily refer to Tarantulas in particular. The Space Marine quote, for example, refers to "sentry weapons", not Tarantulas specifically. Clearly, the Marines are still using the superior grav-equipped version, whose statistics are not presented here in order to avoid sending Guard players into fits of jealousy.
Quote:
You "blather on" about Tarantulas being the tools of a fluid combat force, and you're just making stuff up that bears no relation to the Warhammer 40,000 background setting.
Alternately, I'm balancing the modern interpretation with the old.
I am going to explicitly point out that these aren't the same Tarantulas Imperial Armor talks about. The most recent source is not God, E&C. Indeed, it's a Forge World publication. Forge World, you may have noticed, are not the Studio, for all they are closely associated and I think their work is occasionally better. I have multiple portrayals of Tarantulas that have them mobile. This forum is filled to the brim with people who pretend vast swathes of background don't exist according to their whims, sometimes including almost everything after
Space Marine. Considering the amount of stuff in NetEA lists that has been made up, I think mashing together two bits of background and whistling innocently is relatively minor.
So saying "these are different, superior, Tarantulas", is more than enough. Which is what I will do. But they can have the same damn name in the background text without calamity resulting.
Quote:
At most, you could make them move 0cm, but transportable by Rhinos. There's no other way you're going to get them into a list as being mobile. And even that doesn't really follow the background.
You mean the background which, in Imperial Armor Volume I (page 104) says that Tarantulas "can be carried in the back of a Chimera or Rhino"...?
Quote:
Lots of formations still look too cheap.
Well, there're Tacticals, Assaults, Devastators, Terminators, Vindicators, Heavy Support and Dreadnoughts that you could (or could not) be referring to. IIRC, everything else is the same cost as in the Codex list.
Of those:
Tacticals, Assaults and Devastators would seem to be at prices you've suggested before for the default list. I could see Devs going back to 250, but Tacs and Devs seem pricey at those levels.
Terminators can't Air Assault any more and still cost 350 when teleporting. Their reduced cost is to help make the Terminators + LRs combination viable. Are garrisoning Terminators that serious a threat?
Vindicators no one's mentioned so far. If you feel they're too cheap, I could see putting them up to 225. 250 feels like a bit too much (especially next to Predators at 275).
Heavy Support: that's what nealhunt suggested, IIRC, and his reasoning made a lot of sense. Would that price be better for five Support Weapons instead of six?
Dreadnoughts: I think you suggested that price point as well...I may be wrong, though. Perhaps it was Morgan Vening. In any case, it'll be a very slow formation - I can't see anyone being very interested at a particularly higher cost.
EDIT: (You're supposed to point out where my assumptions have fallen flat in the above, just to be clear).
