fair(ish) points, although a tank company (even a small one) picks up blast markers far slower than guard or even marines, 4+ RA means it takes 4 hits to kill a tank, that's 4 hits to cause 1 BM, wheras that's 4 dead guard infantry (unless they're hiding in cover)

a SL tank company is only 2 models bigger than an upgraded tank cataphract, which comes in 25 points cheaper and has slightly better firepower on a per-tank basis, I can't see a problem there, you have crusader robots as cheap throwaway activation count boosters (much like IG have sentinels) and thanks to your list structure (something I really like) you aren't restricted to being forced to take a 3rd company to open up extra support slots

I really can't see a sensibly built army using the original list in the OP being much more fragile than a SL army

In my opinion the marine comparison is a total apples-to-oranges situation, totally different armies and playstyles, and although the ATSKNF rule was added to make marines viable, there is so much gumf written about how totes amazeballs marines are in all the army books and codexes and black library books to justify it.... from the background, a single marine costs about the same in imperial resources as a million guardsmen, and is widely regarded as well worth the investment..... they're artificially weakened in game terms to make it somewhat balanced I feel

I think you could get away with some kind of rule which ignores the -1 penalty to rally tests for enemy within 30cm and probably stick a spirit stones type upgrade in there to provide a formation wide leader ability.... surely that's enough! never rallying on less than a 4+ is pretty solid, and I can provide numerous examples where not having that has lost me a game when using steel legion.... built-in leader would be useful to avoid them re-breaking when a single ork shouts 'boo' at them too....

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

Is the Techpriest intended to be a character or just represented by the blessings rule.
I'd prefer as a character with the bonus' tied to it, Maniples could be 5 tanks + character for X points and if the character is lost then the bonus' are lost too.

I like the idea of Walker, Leader and either Inv.Save or possibly giving the formation Thick Rear Armour instead as I think this would be more useful, (either as the Tech Priest character or just as the Blessings rule).

Also I reckon the 5-tank formation is overcosted..... EUK Ulani list has 6 russ/demolisher/executioners for 400 points, as NetEA executioners are different I believe, I reckon you could easily justify dropping them to 400, or even 375

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

they are over costed in comparison to Minervan list, though the vanquisher should be 25pts more expensive per unit than executioners. That's a fairly hefty 125 pts per formation difference if you follow Minervan pricing.

I also prefer a simple char based leader route, something like:

[core character]
One per 500pts free, added as formation upgrade. Only adds leader.

upgrade of one of the following costed [additional characters] per formation, grant:
Field engineer – additional leader OR formation joined gains walker
Archeo-bombardier – 75cm MW3+ sniper (or whatever)

I don't think a bonus for rallying with foes nearby is representative of battlefield repairs. If anything they should repair worse when foes are near and better when they are far away … like regular rallying.

_________________
AFK with real life, still checking PMs

yeah but you get a free one in SL.... can't see how 25 points per tank is justified for a small formation though, it's not a linear equation to balance these things...

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

The EUK stats for executioners would be appropriate (or pull a "pure" plasma Ad Mech version with sponson plasma cannons) because as it stands using Minervan pricing Executoners would come out around 325 & Vanquishers around 450.


Same here but I think that's where discussion has come to at this point (unless pain killers have defeated me again [shakes fist at bottle]) and the discussion is about the various CH upgrade effects

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

I think Vaaish had included the benefits of the proposed Special Rules in with the cost of the formation, if so they could be dropped to a more reasonable cost if the Special Rules are no longer included.

Yes, we've decided on some form of character built in base with optional upgrades that shift the style of play.

I dislike leader for the same reason I dislike giving a vindicator the walker rule. It's more than a little awkward to justify how a tank walks when it has treads not legs. Functionally, yes leader might do something similar, but I just really don't like calling a tech priest who is out there trying to affect field repairs a "leader". Since we are making a SR for this, at least make it special.

And by special we want something that helps the list play differently than minervans or even steel legion based around russ coys. Since we have fluff on the cataphractii saying they are sometimes even hardwired into their vehicles and that the skitarii undergo modifications to remove emotions like fear they shouldn't be affected by proximity of enemy units when rallying. What's the use of a steamroller that stops to let everything get out of the way?

Hence why I originally intended this to be a blanket rule. However, since we are heading the character route I believe that making the formations easier to rally provides both gameplay benefit and fits with the fluff. The added 16% odds of removing all BM is a random factor that's cool when it happens but not so regular that you base a strategy around it. I think this helps regardless of how you intend to play the list.

I'd like to see an offensive option that might be something like slaved targeting systems or enhanced combat wetware to boost firepower and a defensive or mobility option that makes it harder to lay BM or kill a unit or allows them better movement or some such.

I'd be willing to back off and allow BM modifiers to affect rallying but not enemy proximity. That puts them rallying on a 3+ and we chalk up the BM as causing difficulty executing a command due to debris or other battlefield disruption.

_________________
-Vaaish

You shouldn't take walker too literally. A better name for the special ability could have been chosen to cover units that don't walk as such, but obviously it's to account for the huge dozer blade. I have no problem with the leader ability being used to account for repairs rather than actual leading - it's exactly how it is with the Necron Tomb Spyder.

Whatever you decide on for the Blessing of the Omnisiah repairs will apply to the regular Skitarii list as well yeah? They would have just as many Tech Priests and hard-wired servitors about the place.

If you're not going to apply it to the regular Skitiarii as well then I think you should just forget the idea.

If I'd expended a great deal of resources working on breaking an enlarged tank formation and then it rallied and lost all it's blast markers I would be somewhat miffed to say the least, random effect or not. That kind of rule can be a game winner and I really dislike anything which can randomly snatch a game from a person who can do nothing to prevent it...... that kind of rule is exactly why I stopped playing warhammer

Also leader is a perfect fit, you not wanting to use a rule because you feel the name is not representative is going down a dark path....even if the effect is almost spot on

I also don't think you can justify the ignoring enemy within 30cm.....from a fluff perspective even totally fearless stuff like necrons, wraithguard and tyranids suffer the penalty

And if you make a tank list, it's going to play like a tank list for the most part.....fighting against that is fruitless IMO

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

I agree with theese statemnets completly. I also see the leader as a really good way of representing the fluff idea without being to overpowered. If you want to make it more interesting maybe grant the unit the fearless ability as long as the techpriest is alive?

And as I´ve said before, personally i son't mind if this list doesn't stand out that much from other tank lists. Maybe 1 or 2 unique formations is enough. Ormaybe it can be achieved with all theese great suggestions for character upgrades?

I still like the idea of a drop
ship fortress though, it's crazy and for sure gives a unique flavour to the list. But if thats way to whacky maybe the list could allow for 1 warhound to be planetfalled or fly in with a drop ship. In the fluff that happens. Sure, it's good but not that good. Make a special rule that it has to arrive on turn 1 or 2 or that it can't do anything on the turn it arrives because it takes some time to powerup the engines/systems/weapons.

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/

"You have a right to be offended" - Steve Hughes
"Your feelings are hurting my thoughts" - Aron Flam

Or granting an invulnerable save, to represent field repairs and impromptu hymns to the Omnissiah.

This is entirely correct and established use within list development. Otherwise you end up making up new rules unnecessarily or having one rule with the same effect under multiple names. There may be other reasons (game mechanics) not to use leader, but not liking the name should in no way influence the decision. You could always put the name in a fluff text wrapper sentence of some sort.

_________________
AFK with real life, still checking PMs

Yes! A even better idea! Very fluffy and cool!!

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/

"You have a right to be offended" - Steve Hughes
"Your feelings are hurting my thoughts" - Aron Flam