Just noticed this while rereading. Iyanden Spirit Warhosts are Init2+. Iyanden is actually the list I have the most experience with, and I've never found Spirit Warrior Hosts to be unbalanced. Rock hard, but the 350 points plus some sort of transport (be it Falcon, Storm Serpent, or Vanpire) means that an Iyanden army will generally lose 1-2 activations per thousand points. If we weren't discussing changes to Titans and the EoVs I'd be perfectly comfortable submitting it for approval as is.

edit: Alaitoc Ranger Warhosts get charged +200 for the four Falcon option? Can anyone shed some light on this?

A hundred of that should be built into the formation cost. It may be a holdover from the days of +65 point Falcons - I'm thinking of changing it to +125-150 (after all the formation can Garrison) in the next version.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

Just noticed this - surely the Spirit Warrior Host can't take anything except Wave Serpent or Webway? The Falcon can't carry Wraithguard, and the Vampire can only carry four...

Yep. Should'a just went to bed instead of posting that. Meant Wave Serpent, not Falcon.

Interestingly, the Vampire can in fact carry 8 Wraithguard, even according to Swordwind. It's been discussed before (the last I found was back in '08), and landed on the side of keeping it. Or maybe the list was changed to 4+2 Wraithguard for the Warhost then changed back later? Anyway, Spirit Warrrior Warhosts are Air-Transportable in vampires.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

Ah, thanks, I see my mistake - I was looking in the tournament pack (which lists the Wraithguard as taking up two slots on a Vampire), not in the compendium.

Just to add yet another vote behind the idea to alter the Pulse Laser, rather than the Power Fist. I've used the dual Pulsar Phantom Titan, and while it was solid, it wasn't that great compared to other fire support choices, so that needs to be rectified.

As for the other suggestions:

1. Increasing the Scorpion's rate of fire to three shots is okay by me, but I'm worried that maintaining a 2+ to hit would be too effective, so 3+ to hit seems like a more sensible place to start.

2. The Cobra conundrum isn't really resolved by just implementing a universal IC in my view, for the reasons others have given. We need to be clear about its role first, and then decide on the rules. If it's agreed that it should be a WE destroyer, then IC isn't the solution. As to what is, I continue to disagree with most of the suggestions for change which have been put forward thus far, yet find myself unable to think of a better idea. As a result, I find myself in the 'leave it alone' camp at the moment.

3. I'm not overly bothered about a discount for Engines of Vaul formations, but if the majority wants it, and it proves to be balanced, I won't oppose it.

4 & 5 don't concern me in the least, and I've already made my views known about point 6.

_________________

Hmm yeah the Cobra. I also don't think there's much point in just returning the standard IC rule - it should happen anyway in the context of the current stats, but won't do anything to fix the actual problem with the unit.

I agree a rethink is needed on this unit. If we want it to be a WE killer but explicitly not an infantry killer, barrage is the problem, it either needs a special rule, or a move away from barrage. Bad as both those options are. If we decide we want it to be potentially awesome vs war engines, potentially decent vs armoured infantry, but really really random, the stats as they are just need a small adjustment - which stat exactly will depend on whether we want to increase utility, increase potential damage, etc. For example, currently it is really focussed on high DC war engines because the hits scale linearly with the dice. Making it so it only needs 1 hit to take out a small WE (i.e. increasing the minimum damage) could make it worth the risk to attack them. Just an example.

If such a rethink can't happen now, I guess it's OK to give it IC back for the time being.

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

I'm still in favor of letting Cobras ignore Void Shields etc. Makes it better at the WE killer role, fits the background and doesn't affect tanks and infantry.

True. Physical barriers (even made out of pure energy) aren't a great help if you and a big chunk of your surroundings are sucked into a black hole.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Not that I'm opposed to this idea, it sounds very appropriate for a D-Cannon. But should it then not extend to the Titan D-Cannon (and perhaps even the Warp Hunter (if it gets official rules), the Support Weapon Platform, and the Wraithguards)?

Anything larger than the Cobra D-Cannon, yes. Wraithguard and platforms, no. Smaller weapons don't need anything apart from MW.

ignoring void shields will make the cobra absurdly good at killing gargants, quite good at killing imperial titans, and still rubbish at killing super heavies, eldar titans, and sundry other war engines.

I still find it quite interesting(/depressing) that the cobra is considered underpowered, and my proposed unit from the bloody hand, the slaughtersword, which is to my mind, slightly worse, and more appropriately focused on warengine killing, recieved several complains of overpowerededness

i shall again suggest you look at the thinking i did with the slaughtersword. the current result of which makes it good at killing war engines, but not unreasonably so. it has a BP1 weapon (so that its base to hit vs infantry and tanks are the same, which does not happen again ever) with a special rule that gives it a bonus to hit with its AT value in certain circumstances. this results in a vehicle that can kill infantry, but is much better value at killing big targets, which was its goal.

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

Please note my comments here with respect to Fire Prisms and Phoenix bombers.

Both are noted, though I'm still not decided on solutions to either.

The Unit Reference Sheets in the Biel-Tan thread now contain ALL units, including army unique units for the other four on page 3. It was simply uneconomical to force players to print out ten pages of stats where the unique units fit onto a single page together.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

I think that this is a very sensible move. It also makes it easier to keep track of the status of the stat lines for all the craftworld armies, rather than continually having to update individual documents.

_________________