Thunderhawk without fearless (in the SL battle) would have been destroyed I assume, as per air rules for losing air assaults 'If the aircraft loses the assault it is destroyed'. In this situation ATSKNP would not have saved it, as it was not being hurt by hackdowns, but due to being 0 speed and an aircraft. Fearless does help the thunderhawk stay around longer (as intended by list), but I think it may be too strong as it removes one of the risks of the air assault.

List would have looked different if knights were WE, as the WE/air section was pretty much maxed (which is why i took a subj, no points for questor). If they had been in WE section I would have had to think carefully (espec at 2k, only 660 allies points to play with) as it would be hard to take a solid formation of them and air assault.


Other lists used against EC were as follows:

Steel legion 2k/7 activations:

RHQ (+hydra) BTS
Inf Coy
Manticores
Shadowsword
Sentinels
Thunderbolts
Warhound pair (had to be a pair to fit in 660pt allies allowance)

Marines 2k/7 activations:

Devastators (+hunter, +SC) BTS
Terminators (+chaplain)
Land Speeders
Predators (all annihilator +hunter)
Thunderhawk (transporting terminators)
Thunderbolts
Warhound

(i do own 'proper' warhounds, honest, 's just they're all in bits! )

_________________
AFK with real life, still checking PMs

Playtest 4 batrep is up in the battle reports forum. 2-1 victory in turn 3 for the Children.

_________________
Let us playtest like the Greeks of old... You know the ones I mean

A comment:

- Slaanesh Knights are a prominent part of many people's Slaanesh collection. It is a pity to relegate them to WE section and additionally to limit them to 0-1. It would be far preferable, from a collector's point of view to have them in the main army section, where they have always been, regardless of the army they were in.

I am in favour of stat changes, as posted in another thread, but perhaps you should consider a price increase with those stats. It does seem a pretty unanimous observation.

A suggestion:

- I am not altogether against a demonic-infested Thunderhawk that would be fearless, though I believe it will need a lot of stress testing. However, demonic thunderhawks have a rule in 40k whereby transported troops have a risk of being eaten along the way. This system has a precedent in NetEA with the Frogbear developed Slaughterfiends, whereby transported troops of that demon engine must check for dangerous terrain when loading. Also, demon engines are traditionally 2+ initiative (edit: and have an invulnerable save). I suggest we add both those systems to your Thunderhawks for balance, instead of a price increase.

You could also take the occasion to upgun the Thunderhawk with Lasacnnons and Hellfire missiles, with a consequent price upgrade.

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

Where units show up is a function of list design, not the unit themselves. That being said, I can't really get behind the reasoning "well people have a bunch of these in their collections" as being meaningful in the design discussion. Anytime I see a 0-1 limitation (outside of SCs) I usually would suggest another mechanism instead as it should better scale between 3k and 5k. I don't have a better suggestion however so take what I say with a grain of salt. captPiett, what's the reasoning on 0-1, mate?
Edit: I misunderstood the list. As i read it, it's 0-1 as an upgrade slot PER core formation. Basically you can't take 4 packs as a single upgrade allowance.


Huh I wasn't aware of all that in 40k. Kinda interesting ideas to think about and seem very much something EC-ish.

_________________
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!

Battle Report posted, thoughts in this post after the report:
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=84&p=504674#p504674

Looking at the army a couple weeks ago, I started discussing the feasibility of a drop list with the Emperor's Children. An avid Red Corsairs player, I like the in-your-face style of a drop list, but they're high-risk, high reward. I feel like you almost have to go for DTF and TSNP, while trying to pin down the enemy on the other side of the board in a war of attrition. There's definitely a lot of give and take with the play style. Even so, having watched a couple games of EC before taking the helm, I like the demon-heavy drop list far better than the all ground pound list.

_________________
--Ruth

Night Lords Sub-AC

Night Lords Painting Blog

Ruth, Thank you for the battle report. Another report is up in the batrep section, EC vs. Orks. Orks took it 3-1 in turn 3.

Jimmy: sorry, didn't see the question in your post. The knights have always been intended as a 1 per army formation. My reasoning is that they are a flavor unit, not the focus of the list. Since there are a potential 6 knights per this one formation, there is plenty of opportunity for variety and for people to use the Slaanesh knights in their collection.

Partly with this in mind, I've replaced 4.0 with 4.0.1 in the first post in this thread. The minor changes were building up, so some housekeeping needed to be done. To refresh everyone's memory: knights are in the WE section, as a 0-1 choice and at initiative 2+ (along with the scout titans). I've also bumped up the price for the noise marine formation to 300 points, to make the noise marine/t-hawk combo more expensive.

Speaking of which, another batrep is in the works in which I stress-test this combo against steel legion. In short, I learned the "high risk" part of this "high risk, high reward" list build. Time to shovel some snow though. More later.

_________________
Let us playtest like the Greeks of old... You know the ones I mean

Is it your intention to have THawks at initiative 2+? If not, the initiative sentence for the army list needs to be reworked.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

They are 1+. I omitted the t-hawks from that sentence, aiming to indicate that they're 1+ like the rest of the EC. How would you rework that sentence then?

_________________
Let us playtest like the Greeks of old... You know the ones I mean

All Emperor's Children and Thunderhawk formations have an initiative rating of 1+, all other formations have an initiate rating of 2+.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

Ok - what Dave said then. The 3 others who have downloaded the list in the last couple of hours please use the above initiative statement. I'll put up a corrected version soon. One more batrep to write... jeez, is there any more snow I could shovel instead?

EDIT: ok, new new version 4.0.1x up now for download. I also added in the summoning costs for the daemons, copied from the Black Legion list.

Also, Batrep posted for my game against Dwarf Supreme's steel legion. This was to test the T-hawks and noise marine combo. Along with the knights, this made taking aircraft impossible as there wasn't enough room under the 1/3 WE limit. I think this is why I had a brain fart in not being able to prep assaults from afar (i.e. across the board turn 1). One assault failed, another t-hawk was CAPd and critted with its cargo still on board, and one assault was successful. A fair amount of bad luck in that one. More "stress testing" of this type of build is needed. Perhaps tone down the t-hawks to 2 FMs, take a hell talon FM, and use really cheap knights (or not at all and take more aircraft).

Overall, 7 3k battles with batreps (not including Apoc's helpful experiments posted above) so far with the EC - they have a 2-5 win-loss record. IIRC the knights have been in all of those games, and the T-hawks in all but one. Needless to say, I'd like to see results from outside my little piece of the US. More hard data is alway welcome!

_________________
Let us playtest like the Greeks of old... You know the ones I mean

Planning a game on 27th, will report my findings!

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

Cool! Looking forward to your report

_________________
Let us playtest like the Greeks of old... You know the ones I mean

Okay gonna test the following list out:

Retinue - 3 rhino, pact, stalker - 330
Retinue - 3 rhino, pact - 280
Retinue - 3 rhino, pact - 280
Noise marines - 2 noise marines, pact - 370
terminators - pact - 300
Armoured company - 2 pred, 2 land raider, stalker - 300
Armoured company - 2 pred, 2 land raider, stalker - 300
Thunderhawk - 200
Thunderhawk - 200
4 hell scourge - 300
chosen - 125
daemon pool - 1 lesser - 15

I'll probably teleport and summon with the terminators then use thunderhawks to recycle the noise marines, back it all up with retinues asaulting and knights running around splatting infantry, should be fun!

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

Excellent, I'm curious how a higher-activation count army will work. When I try to fit in a lot of goodies, I end up on the low side (it feels like, anyway). Also with the knights and the thunderhawks taking up the 1/3 limit, I'm often conflicted about where to commit points in the air game, a single FM of helblades (if that), or more stalkers. Please let me know if the stalkers provide adequate defense against enemy air. (That's more a personal play style question than list writing; I'm not planning on changing the structure of the list)

Is the lack of a SC warlord intentional? Hopefully my terrible luck in consistently activating the slaanesh knights will be evened out when you use them

_________________
Let us playtest like the Greeks of old... You know the ones I mean

it was either the warlord or the scouts (go DP or go home... ) and I figured having scouts is pretty crucial.... it's tempting to drop an armoured company and put the warlord in and buy some hellblades and another stalker, I may do that actually

(also I forgot the daemon engines are int2+.... 18 months playing nothing but marines has gotten me used to everything activating without problems!)

_________________
Just some guy

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator