certainly, however I'd prefer a 'boots on the ground' approach to the list, if you think it could work in that context feel free

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

I'm curious to see what you'd suggest for them LoM
At the same time I'd ask
- why you'd think that RG is not in a stable form. It's solidy developmental (though AC less). Far more than most Marine lists
- what's wrong with assault rams as they stand now (so I can better understand the approach)
irrespective, I don't see them fitting in a defensive style list. That of course isn't decided yet by our illustrious champion

_________________
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!

Things I want to see in this list:
- Land Raider Achilles
- Thunderfire cannons
- Marine Siege specialists and dreds
- The ability to take emplacements, bunkers, dugouts, razorwire, mines, and dugouts
the idea of the fortress in lieu of objective that you can then "grow" your deployment zone.from would be neat too.


of course then we need to build the siege assault version of this. A complementary but distinct list

_________________
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!

Raven Guard:
It is still developmental, so everything is on the table concerning its contents. It is not because it has benefitted from no development for some time that it is stable. Note that it looks good in many ways but there is certainly room for improvement. Maybe we could discuss this further in the RG thread.

Caestus rams:
As they are now, they fulfill the same battlefield role as storm ravens, which is odd, as the two units really fulfill different roles in the fluff, one is a fast attack transporter, the other is a siege ram.

My take on them would be:

Caestus Assault Rams - AV
Move: 15 cm
Armour: 4+/CC5+/FF5+
Firefury ML 30cm 2BP, disrupt, one-shot
Magna Melta: MW4+, MW FF
Frag assault launchers: (contact), (Assault weapons)
Note: Skimmer, Reinforced Armour, Planetfall, Transport (2 infantry, even Terminators)

Upgrade for infantry formations, except scouts: 100 for 2

This way it really acts as heavy assault supporting pods, illustrating the need for heavy support to SM orbital siege assaults, against fortified zones. They also remain slow, so no zooming around, but definitely help the troops they are transporting/supporting, in many way similar to gorgons would.

Before anyone jumps from their seats with 40k stats giving them the fast ability, I really think that is a misthought of the conceptors, as rams are only fast when launched from the spacecraft (planetfall), but have only very small engines for the aftermath.

Edit: Maybe jump packs would even be more appropriate, rather than skimmer

_________________
"War is not about who is right, but about who is left". - B. Russell

Yes to all of that , but why a disctinct list? Siege armies are supposed to handle both offense and defense.

_________________
"War is not about who is right, but about who is left". - B. Russell

Good question and one that deserves clarification. It's mainly the composition of the units and the presence of breaker style equipment in one vs hard as nails defenses in the other. For instance, and mind you this is a non-inclusive and trite example, I could see the defensive list having lots of automations like Tarantulas and more bunkers. The assault list would have access to spacecraft and rams. Complimentary

Now that being said, it might not need a separate list instead of a list mechanic that opens one of two paths based on the core choices taken.

_________________
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!

This please

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

I think that would be a good idea as I'm not sure a list allowing defensive siege elements and offensive stuff would be balanceable or fun to play against.

I'd like something along the lines of -
Core - tacticals, devs, armour etc
Assault - caestus etc
Defensive - bunkers etc
Picking units from assault means you can't pick from defensive and vice versa, perhaps even different list of upgrades to the core formations based on whether you have picked from assault or defensive.

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

To expand on the above, perhaps the alternative choice (defensive/assault) could perhaps be chosen as part of the 33% allies choice.

_________________
"War is not about who is right, but about who is left". - B. Russell

You're going to run afoul of the usual titan and Naval contingents most likely. Or are you saying that 33% of the points must be spent either in the Assault or in the Defense, but not both?

_________________
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!

If you play a Defense list, you get 33% among Titans/naval/assault combined

If you play an Assault list, you get 33% among Titans/naval/defense combined.

Edit: Or something more restrictive like: for every 3 choices in defense, you get 1 choice in assault.

_________________
"War is not about who is right, but about who is left". - B. Russell

Depends really what you're going to put in the sections, maybe
Core
Defensive/Assault - can be up to 1/2 pts - if you're putting lots of formations in these sections
titans/air - 1/3 as normal, or/as well even have different titan/air choices depending on assault/defensive

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

Wouldn't this take a little away from the idea of being a specialised core list. If it's specialised then it shouldn't have to rely on the Allies to make it special. Restrictions would need to be made on the allies section to ensure the list maintains it's specialism. I would look to specialist troop and some interesting rules additions to give it the character it needs IMHO.

I might be repeating someone else here (if so, I apologize, I'll attribute you!) but I couldn't find what I thought I read so...

Rather than playing with %s between Core, Assault, and Defensive, how about this:

Core - tacticals, devs, terminators, scouts, dreadnoughts, core marine armor (predators, vindicators, whirlwinds, land raiders)
Assault - caestus, landing craft, land speeders, bikes (?), assault squads, (possibly land raider spartans, or land raider ares?)
Defensive - bunkers, specialist siege armor (achilles, LR helios(?)), automated defenses, thunderfires (or put Tfires in core?)

Separate sub-section for unit upgrades (Characters, Centurions (?), Dreadnoughts, etc.)

Selecting 1 Core formation lets you take 0-2 (0-1?) Defense or Assault Formations. You must have a 3:1 ratio between Defense and Assault formation selections.

Then the usual 33% Allies/Aerospace option, with units limited (fighter aircraft, siege variant battle titans? - A warlord with a corvus pod full of terminators would make for a fun counterpoint to the Iron Warriors list)

In other words: I can take 4 Core formations, use that to unlock 3 Defense Formations and then be able to unlock 1 Assault Formation. Alternatively, you could use those 4 Core formations to unlock 3 Assault Formations, and then be able to unlock 1 Defense Formation.

This would allow someone with, say, an Assault Marine formation in their collection to take them as a rapid-response team while playing Defensive, or could bring in land speeders or something if they really wanted, but the list would still have to strongly embody one of the two things before making selections from the other aspect.



As a totally unrelated suggestion, would this list be a good place to consider Forgeworld's Deathwind Drop pods? (whirlwind launcher, and/or assault cannon variants). Expendable teleporting BP direct-fire barrage weapons or assault cannon salvos could make for great area denial weapons on the defensive or spoiler attacks offensively. Could put them in the Assault sub-tree to limit their deployment in the Defensive-aspect list.

_________________
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/armiger84/?hl=en

My General Modelling Blog: http://armiger84.blogspot.com/

the conceptual difference between "one list that has a substantial either/or section, allowing for one of 2 distinct playstyles" and "two lists, each using the same base list and each allowing for a distinct playstyle" is miniscule at best.

That said, I don't think defensive siege lists should have access to any air transports and instead focus on purchasable trenchworks etc and beefed up armoured formations; maybe think about giving them walker or something to represent siege specific alterations to the vehicles. have a lot of Ignore Cover weapons as well; nothing says trench warfare more than gouts of flame after all!