Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 98 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

Let's talk War Engines

 Post subject: Re: Let's talk War Engines
PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2015 6:56 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 9658
Location: Manalapan, FL
Attachment:
sam-jackson-retort.jpg
sam-jackson-retort.jpg [ 152.9 KiB | Viewed 3871 times ]

[playful]

Let's also consider this:
-The number of approved lists with access to Imperial Titan CCW is exactly 1 (and they're only found in 2 other Imperial lists under dev) which is AMTL. (others being Iron hands and Skitarri) so not exactly a prevent threat.
-Also that approved list is singularly suited to be targeted by this lists meaty and plentiful MW/TK weapons [nom nom nom]
-Most armies response, and on a stupid level with Marines, is to leverage the air assault and teleport flexibility in those lists as an answer to enemy WE. Basically throwing Terminators into CC with them. Those lists with that type of flexibility are balanced by a relative dearth of AT weapons in general and MW in specific. You're basically disenfranchising an entire Faction and most Lists in general with their standard WE counters.
-Gargants are another nice foe in CC to face but considering how unreliable shooting they are (they are not going to sustain...ever) they're going be telegraphing their charge strategy like a new york mugger ;D If they catch you you deserve to get hurt.
-Older edition stats are to give inspiration but must take a back seat to the realities of vastly different rule systems.
-Very viable strategies exist for bogging down a CCW War Engine of death running right at you with screening formations. (Again, setting it up for you to nuke the rampaging beast). Apoc held up a 9 shield great gargant with Warlord going for the T&H in our last game with a couple of formations of scouts and some bunkers preventing a T4 and thus pulling off a very nicely commanded win.

I will accept the list lacks a good story around disposable scout activations so fair's fair but 4+ CC war engines is poppycock.

Sorry but this really comes down to "I don't like my toys getting blown up".

As it stands the list WE are overpowered for the points (by 150-200 points). I think Elsaurio is very much on the right track with conversations about ditching spotter (that little vehicle on the back spotting should be abstracted in EA into the BP-it's assumed to be helping the artillery hit the target better aka BP to-hit rolls, but not directly taking part in the battle) and getting rid of indirect on the Cyclopse.

_________________
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!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Let's talk War Engines
PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2015 7:16 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 4:36 am
Posts: 113
Location: Washington State, USA.
All very good points here. It actually isn't that I don't want my toys blown up, it's more unfamiliarity with the system. For instance, I did not know close combat titans were that limited.

I thought they had just as many options as they used to in 2nd edition.

And as I said, I agree that the WE are under cost for what you get. It is why I said I believe they need to cost more but keep the cc4+.

What do you think of the AA proposal on the Cyclops?

_________________
Resident Squat Army Fanatic


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Let's talk War Engines
PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2015 9:01 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 8:31 am
Posts: 328
Location: Harrogate
Forgive me if I missed something but what about the Overlords, Goliaths, Moles and Hellbores. I play Tiny-Tim's Squats a fair amount and am interested in squat development btw love this thread Elsaurio you have really thrown your self into it.

_________________
http://brokenuniverse1978.blogspot.co.uk


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Let's talk War Engines
PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2015 9:01 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 2:54 pm
Posts: 306
jimmyzimms wrote:
sorry i meant the more general discussion on "lifted" abilities into the core set is approaching off-topic (which was the direction of the reply to your quoted reply :D ).

Yeah that's the text of it. The actual list itself titles it, or at least for years and years did before the move into Dave's excellent CMS, as Improved Coms.

I'm wondering if that's the missing angle (or something else along that line of thought) to giving the Leviathan a purpose. It's good at directing troops and coordinating a battle who's presence in the Army allows better C&C. Careful positioning of assets to perform a sweeping engagement at the right time using an ability like that can really sway the outcome of a battle.

Food for thought.

edit: post coffee ingestion spelling corrections performed in posts above :)



I'll pull the Cadian rules so we can have a chat about it

Image

It has:
Two less void shields
+15cm range on the lascannons
Transported units can fire from the back.
Possibly Improved Comms rules?

How insane would it be to simply pick and drop into the Thugrim list?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Let's talk War Engines
PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2015 11:16 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 4:36 am
Posts: 113
Location: Washington State, USA.
Hmm, I don't know if I could trust a WE for transporting a lot of models if it only has 2 void shields. It just sounds like its too dangerous for the troops being transported.

_________________
Resident Squat Army Fanatic


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Let's talk War Engines
PostPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2015 1:12 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 2:54 pm
Posts: 306
Roadkill Zombie wrote:
Hmm, I don't know if I could trust a WE for transporting a lot of models if it only has 2 void shields. It just sounds like its too dangerous for the troops being transported.


That's still more protection than almost every other transport in the game.

It would come either with a price drop, or a 'squat bonus' of more void shields


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Let's talk War Engines
PostPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2015 1:13 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 2:54 pm
Posts: 306
Consul Avenging Angel wrote:
Forgive me if I missed something but what about the Overlords, Goliaths, Moles and Hellbores. I play Tiny-Tim's Squats a fair amount and am interested in squat development btw love this thread Elsaurio you have really thrown your self into it.


We'll get to them! Lets do the big War Engines first!

My plan is start a separate thread on each tactical group:

*Airwing
*Artillery
*Infantry
*Tunnellers

And probably one on
*AA
*Squat Special Rules


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Let's talk War Engines
PostPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2015 1:16 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 8:01 pm
Posts: 1501
I would make my usual comment on this. Squats, as they stand, are not a top tier army so they don't need any major debuffing. For me it's more a case of making the less effective war engines into competitive choices compared to the Cyclops and the colossus.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Let's talk War Engines
PostPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2015 1:18 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 2:54 pm
Posts: 306
Roadkill Zombie wrote:
I like what you are doing here. This is a great discussion. Though I am new to the board I have played a lot of 2nd edition Epic and I would love to discuss this with you guys.

My first question is this. If you change the CC from a 4+ to a 5+, may I ask you, what else do the Squat WE have for dealing with something like a Titan with a close combat weapon? From what I can tell, other than shooting it, the Squat WE don’t really have anything to help out in that department. I personally don’t believe it should be an auto loss to the Squat WE’s whenever they take on something like a titan, which I believe it would be if the CC were changed. The reason the Close Assult Factor on the Squat WE were so high in 2nd edition was so that they did stand a chance against something like a Banelord Chaos Titan of Khorne if they happened to get engaged by it in close combat. The Close Assult Factor was also so high to discourage titan hunting units like Terminators from close assaulting without pausing first to think if it was a good idea. People may complain about how dangerous the Squat WE are in close combat, but that was entirely the point. They are SUPPOSED to be dangerous.



This is a change in the way the main rules handle combat betwen 2nd ed and EpicA. In EpicA, both sides can inflict hits on each other, so a high close combat value has no 'protection' like it did in 2nd ed.

That being said, if a close combat titan monster gets in (and although rare, there are quite a few in Orks, Chaos, Daemons, Necrons etc, I would even include Terminators in that list) then the War Engine is pretty much toast, no matter what CC value it is.


Quote:
The way I used it (and if it stays a transport, will continue to use it, if allowed) was to transport my Squat Bikers and Trikes forward until they needed to get out (because I knew the Leviathan was gonna die that turn) or because they had an objective they had to race over to get. Keeping them inside the leviathan meant they didn’t take a lot of fire when the opponent was at his strongest, so that gave the bikes and trikes the ability to survive until the opponents forces were weaker, then move to taking objectives or assaulting. So I hope the Leviathan remains a transport.


Oh the Levithan will remain a transport! The only discussion is weather to leave it as is or align it with the Cadian one.

Quote:
So I was reading the thread started by Moscovian about giving the Squats some form of mobile AA apparently because once you leave the bubble of the Thunderfire Cannons AA coverage the squats get murdered by enemy aircraft. So he started asking what we could put mobile AA on so it doesn’t break the list. Reading through it, it seemed obvious to me that the most likely machine to do this would be the Squat Cyclops. The Battlecannon on the tower has always screamed “Snap Fire” to me when I look at it, snap fire being the 2nd edition version of AA. I have always thought it looks more like a mobile AA weapon up there on that tower than the Battlecannon that it actually was. So turning it into a 30CM or 45 CM 1 dice mobile AA platform does two things, 1) it makes the Cyclops more than just a titan hunter, it turns it into a support vehicle that covers your entire army by providing both Anti Titan and Anti air abilities. 2) It opens up the list from being a sit back in your corner and castle, to being one that can move forward and advance on the enemy with some aggression without being worried that every single time they do this they will get torn apart by aircraft.



There will certainly be a while discussion thread just on AA! It's probably the top priority to fix in the Squat list right now


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Let's talk War Engines
PostPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2015 1:21 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 4:36 am
Posts: 113
Location: Washington State, USA.
I don't think it would be too crazy to add to the Thurgrim list but you may want it as an option, not just the only version of the Leviathan. And if you did add this one, since its CC is 5+, you would probably want to tone down the rest of the WE to a 5+ as well so people don't start asking why one is better than the other.

_________________
Resident Squat Army Fanatic


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Let's talk War Engines
PostPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2015 1:41 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:14 am
Posts: 3416
Location: Western Australia
jimmyzimms wrote:
Attachment:
sam-jackson-retort.jpg

[playful]

Let's also consider this:
-The number of approved lists with access to Imperial Titan CCW is exactly 1 (and they're only found in 2 other Imperial lists under dev) which is AMTL. (others being Iron hands and Skitarri) so not exactly a prevent threat.
-Also that approved list is singularly suited to be targeted by this lists meaty and plentiful MW/TK weapons [nom nom nom]
-Most armies response, and on a stupid level with Marines, is to leverage the air assault and teleport flexibility in those lists as an answer to enemy WE. Basically throwing Terminators into CC with them. Those lists with that type of flexibility are balanced by a relative dearth of AT weapons in general and MW in specific. You're basically disenfranchising an entire Faction and most Lists in general with their standard WE counters.
-Gargants are another nice foe in CC to face but considering how unreliable shooting they are (they are not going to sustain...ever) they're going be telegraphing their charge strategy like a new york mugger ;D If they catch you you deserve to get hurt.
-Older edition stats are to give inspiration but must take a back seat to the realities of vastly different rule systems.
-Very viable strategies exist for bogging down a CCW War Engine of death running right at you with screening formations. (Again, setting it up for you to nuke the rampaging beast). Apoc held up a 9 shield great gargant with Warlord going for the T&H in our last game with a couple of formations of scouts and some bunkers preventing a T4 and thus pulling off a very nicely commanded win.

I will accept the list lacks a good story around disposable scout activations so fair's fair but 4+ CC war engines is poppycock.

Sorry but this really comes down to "I don't like my toys getting blown up".

As it stands the list WE are overpowered for the points (by 150-200 points). I think Elsaurio is very much on the right track with conversations about ditching spotter (that little vehicle on the back spotting should be abstracted in EA into the BP-it's assumed to be helping the artillery hit the target better aka BP to-hit rolls, but not directly taking part in the battle) and getting rid of indirect on the Cyclopse.

Love your work Jimmy.
A big +1 from me.

Good stuff Elsaurio. I like your stewardship a lot.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Let's talk War Engines
PostPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2015 9:41 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 8:01 pm
Posts: 1501
Rug wrote:
Roadkill Zombie wrote:
Hmm, I don't know if I could trust a WE for transporting a lot of models if it only has 2 void shields. It just sounds like its too dangerous for the troops being transported.


We've had great problems down powering Gorgons and they have no shields! This is exceptional protection.

The difference is that it's a single transport (where gorgons are often in pairs), it only moves 15cm and doesn't have Walker. Plus it's 375 points (though you do get some serious shooting for that). Essentially, you're putting units in it to shield them from shooting only, not to move them quickly as well so it better be good at that. I like the idea of it being able to carry bikes, that opens up some interesting possibilities.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Let's talk War Engines
PostPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2015 9:53 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 2:54 pm
Posts: 306
StevekCole wrote:
Rug wrote:
Roadkill Zombie wrote:
Hmm, I don't know if I could trust a WE for transporting a lot of models if it only has 2 void shields. It just sounds like its too dangerous for the troops being transported.


We've had great problems down powering Gorgons and they have no shields! This is exceptional protection.

The difference is that it's a single transport (where gorgons are often in pairs), it only moves 15cm and doesn't have Walker. Plus it's 375 points (though you do get some serious shooting for that). Essentially, you're putting units in it to shield them from shooting only, not to move them quickly as well so it better be good at that. I like the idea of it being able to carry bikes, that opens up some interesting possibilities.


I already assumed that if we were to switch to the weaker Cadian version, it would come with a corresponding drop in price.

Something that not many people realize is that currently the Leviathan in 1.5 can already carry bikes.

What is interesting with the Cadian version is that "up to 6 units can shoot and use FF from the top of Leviathan". That opens up interesting options with some of the possible passengers (Trikes? Rapiers? Tarantulas?)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Let's talk War Engines
PostPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2015 9:56 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:04 pm
Posts: 5999
Location: UK
For additional units to draw parallels to for leviathan the orkeasauurs and plague tower are worth looking at. Both are large WE transports as a single mini to transport an entire formation. Plague tower is the closest on points and firepower compared to the rest (more DC, no voids, lots of guns but no MW barrage).

_________________
AFK with real life, still checking PMs


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 98 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net