I went through every Squat thread I could find and then compared all the suggestions and complaints against what we have now. The following should be a comprehensive list of items that could potentially change. It doesn't mean they are all going to change, however. I included some items only because they were concerns of others, not necessarily mine.

The post is long, so be patient, read through it, and discuss as necessary. It is actually seven areas, even though it looks like twenty-five.
#1 Scout Deficiency
#2 Overlord Pricing / arc modifiers
#3 Thunderfire pricing / armament
#4 Cyclops missiles
#5 Robot changes / pricing
#6 Land Train Issues
#7 Tunnelers

#1. Scout deficiency:
There are only three real options for scouts at this point: Tarantulas, Iron Hawks, and Berserkers. Please let me know which you see being the better choice.

Berserker Option: 5 Berserkers, 1 Hearthguard + Transport for (175 or 200?). 15cm, 6+ Armor, CC4+, FF5+. Scout.

One concern is pricing. 175 is the same price as before and I was convinced the Berserkers were pretty well priced. Are they going to be too well priced? At 200, are they too expensive? Comparing them to SM Scouts at 150 points, the Berserkers have worse armor, no ranged shot (except from the Hearthguard), and no TSKNF.

Another concern is having a Scout as a Core selection. I’m not sure what to do with that.

Tarantula Option: 5 Tarantulas at (175 or 200?). LV 10cm, Armor 6+, CC5+, FF5+(6+), 2 x AP5+ 30cm or 2 x AT5+ 45cm. Scout. Autonom.

Concerns seem to be centered around them just not fitting properly as ‘scouts’, that they don’t control area like thinking troops would. Also, price would need to be determined. Scout would make them better choices, but were they overpriced to begin with? And are these things Infantry or LV? The big concern with changing them to Infantry is that they would need to be based either with Squat infantry (which I didn’t want to do because of the whole autonom thing) or base them 3 to a stand.

Iron Hawk Option: A suggestion to make the Iron Hawk unit a scout was proposed. I don’t have a problem with it, but would it make the unit worthy of a price bump? You see it is already priced at 25 points. So giving it scout is going to make it an almost guaranteed purchase, but 50 points might be a bit steep. And is there any real benefit to this single unit being a scout? Should there be an Iron Hawk formation?

#2. Overlord Pricing: These were changed to 250 each, with 225 for each additional. The question remains though if this price change was enough to balance the Overlords. It was also suggested that the stats be simplified to show three battlecannons with a left arc and three with a right arc. It will make getting a firing solution slightly more difficult for all six battlecannons because you could only bring all six guns to bear on the target if it was pointed dead on, but I am fine with that. It would be more realistic and the only noticeable effect will be for sustain fire orders.

#3. Thunderfire Pricing and Armament: Currently the stats are at 0cm move, AV, 5+ Armor, CC - , FF6+, 60cm AA4+, 75cm AP3+/AT3+ Twin Battlecannon. Two for 100 points.

Concerns: The unit was designed around the WYSIWYG concept with 2 Battlecannons (twinned) and one AA gun. I personally have not seen an abuse of these units, but given some of the feedback I recently got, I promised I would post the concerns.

So, are the Thunderfires too good? Too inexpensive? Both? Neither? One player commented “Man, I would take about six formations of those and place them everywhere!”

Unless there is a really good reason, I would like to stay with the two battlecannons because that is what they were armed with originally. But should they be un-twinned (changed to 2 x AP4+/AT4+)? And what of the AA shot? Should they be changed to 45cm? Should they be LV status? Should the price be upped to 125 or even 150?

These are all concerns that were generated by only a few players, but their opinions could easily be representative of a larger concern. So, is anyone else seeing the Thunderfires as abusive? Changing the AA range might seem reasonable, but then again there is a law of unintended consequences. By reducing the range, players will be tempted to field more Thunderfires. It already feels like an obligatory formation to take (often two of them), so what to do?

#4. Cyclops Missiles: Are the Cyclops missiles superfluous? Right now they are 90cm 6 x 1BP each (one-shots), indirect fire. A suggestion has been made to have them changed to AT shots (AT2+ or AT3+) and losing the indirect fire. Finally, I am considering lowering it from 5 shields to 4 shields.
I’m not keen on losing the indirect fire only because these are missiles mounted on a 45 degree angle. Clearly the design was to have them fire indirect. But the thought process of making the Cyclops more of a WE hunter is a decent enough suggestion to warrant further discussion. Personally, I like the Cyclops, but I will admit the missiles have had negligible impact on my games. Is the Cyclops too inexpensive as is? Currently it is 475 and I have committed to sending it to the 500 point mark. Will that do?

#5. Robot Changes: I am changing them from LVs to AV Walkers. With the price at 225, however, does the Robot formation look any more attractive compared to the Bikers Guild at the same price? Do we need to lower the price on the Robots to 200, even with the AV walker status? Do they need a price bump to 250 or 275? Once again, take a look at the other 225 point formations (Bikes and Thudd Guns) and honestly ask yourself if you think the AV Robots are better, worse, or similar in value.

#6. Land Train issues: After reviewing the cars, I agree that there is a problem with the prices and/or armament on the Mortar Battle Car (currently 75 points) and Bomb Battle Car (currently 100 points).

The Rad Bomb is a one-shot 4BP disrupt weapon for 100 points, but Tim is correct that few people will bring it because the Doomsday Cannon (MW) fired with the Rad Bomb will cancel out both special rules and leave you with a 7BP regular shot. Now that is a decent BP load, but not for 100 points and not for 1 shot.

Suggestion #1: 1BP MW. Remove the one-shot (there could be other bombs in the car). It ends up being a BP boost to the doomsday cannon that will increase it to 4BP, adding that well desired extra template. Price? 50-75 points?

Suggestion #2: 4BP MW One-shot. Would that be worth 100pts? More? Less?

I’m taking other suggestions.

Mortar Battle Cannon is currently armed with 45cm 2BP Indirect Fire, Ignore Cover, Slow-Firing. It was modeled off the armament for the Imperial Guard Bombard.

Suggestion #1: Remain as it is, but with a price drop to 50 points.

Suggestion #2: Model it from the Imperial Guard Griffon instead. Heavy Mortar 30cm 1BP Indirect Fire. Heck, it can even come with a Heavy Bolter as well (30cm AP5+). What would this thing be worth? 50 points? 25 points?

Suggestion #3: Something new. This is always a last resort for me, but I can see why this car would need to be changed. Some sort of 2BP 45cm Indirect Fire, allow it to fire every turn. What would such a car be worth? 100 points? Imagine a Train with 6 of these cars (12BP, not including the Doomsday Cannon). That would be a 800 point Land Train, 8DC, 6 shields, firing a maximum of 15BP 90cm, plus 2 Battlecannons. At 75 points this would be 650 points.

#7. Tunneler issues: While I acknowledge there is something to be done here, the discussion on this has been minimal with no clear path to take. That means a 1.4 list would come out with the full understanding that a 1.5 list with Tunneler issues addressed would be a guarantee. Hopefully people will begin discussing this in earnest.

Other small clean-up items
Rhinos: Will change the transport to reflect that it can move 1 Mole Mortar. It won’t affect this list but it could affect other Squat lists.

Guildmaster: As he is remaining a LV, I will remove the ‘mounted’ description.

Land Train Car Allowance: It should be 2-6 cars.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Quick comments on these topics

I don’t have any problems with this in the list and would go for the fourth option of not needing the change.
This could work, but rather than seeing berserkers as a defensive choice they, in my eyes, become more offensive as you can then garrison them with rhinos for a greater ranged attack in the first turn. (Yes, I would start with them mounted and behind any cover they can find.)
This I agree with.
Can go with this, but don’t feel that it is needed
I’m happy with this. I would prefer to see the stats for the weapons dropped so that the overall cost can be dropped, but appreciate that I’m pretty much a lone voice on this.


They would become too good if they could hide behind a scout shield, however I currently find that they are either hiding away in or behind terrain so that they are not shot at and broken and used purely as AA platforms or in a position to fire and one of the first things shot at to break them and lose my AA cover again. You then find that you have to increase the amount of forces around them to defend them from enemy scouts. It becomes a self defeating tactic. As does taking large numbers of them. You have to place them in harm’s way to use them and your opponent will break them or even ignore them if he is playing a hoard army as they can’t do enough damage.

This change will send shivers down the back of any shielded titan as you will be able to line up a shot, strip the shields with AT fire and then go for the kill with the Hellfury Cannon. BP shots just don’t really hack it for stripping shields.

The question for me is what role are we looking for the robots to fulfil. Once we have this we can get the stats finalised.


I’d go with Suggestion #1: 1BP MW. But keep the one-shot and price at 50 points


Suggestion #3: Something new. But I don’t have any words of wisdom for this at the moment.


I might just be happy to leave this alone in the long term. The question will always be are free rhinos better?

I know they are a different load out than your robots, but I've been using the colossus pretty extensively and they are performing well at 250 for four. I've got them statted as AV 3+, 15cm, 6+ cc, 4+ ff with walker and the automaton rule. They mount a lascannon ans two auto cannons each. The auto cannons give them AA since the skitarii list doesn't have aircraft but its not integral to their function.

Unfortunately, I don't have much report outside of my group since any people playing skitarii seem silent about it.

_________________
-Vaaish

Good input for a discussion Mosc! I'll comment when I have time to sit down and give it a closer look.

On another note, I was reading the 1.32 list last night and reading the Stubborn rule. Is it a bit vague on the rally bit - do squats rally with a +1 modifier or rally on a 1+? I was tired mind you, so it could just be my inability to process sentences late at night.

/Thomas

They essentially activate on a 2 and rally on a 1.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

This is the actual wording:

In addition, Squats rally on a +1 to their initiative roll.

It's the same thing. 2+ is their initiative, so if you add 1 to it your roll you are effectively rallying on a 1+. Even if you misread it, you end up with the same answer.

With that said, I am going to rewrite it so it so the special rule reads without that line about the rallying bonus. I'll instead drop it into the army list in this manner, "All Squat formations have a 2+ initiative roll to activate and a 1+ initiative to rally." It is simpler that way.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

So what you're saying, it should read:

In addition, Squats rally on a +1 modifier to their initiative roll.

or

When testing to rally, Squats get a +1 modifier to their initiative roll.

Sorry to nitpick, you're doing a bangup job on this!

You are correct.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Curse of being a copywriter

#1 Scout Deficiency
Robots. I'm looking into the RT fluff this weekend and also Speaker to Machines reference to the AdMEch list.

#2 Overlord Pricing / arc modifiers
Having played only twice with 2 OL in a formation but nearly 500 seems okay compared to the mobile fortresses and other sht. Fire arcs - no comment/indifferent as I've only fired front arc in my games.

#3 Thunderfire pricing / armament
This is perhaps the strangest model in the squat range, grossly oversized. Armamentwise it seems in line with the fluff, but pricewise it's the best AA gun in the game and the cheapest plus a twin battle cannon, so a price bump could/would/should be in order.

I have not used the LT, cyclops or robots yet. GM could benefit from being inspiring rather than commander, but I haven't tested him since last time I commented on his profile.

Cheers,
Thomas

#1. Scout deficiency:

Iron Hawk Option: A suggestion to make the Iron Hawk unit a scout was proposed. I don’t have a problem with it, but would it make the unit worthy of a price bump? You see it is already priced at 25 points. So giving it scout is going to make it an almost guaranteed purchase, but 50 points might be a bit steep. And is there any real benefit to this single unit being a scout? Should there be an Iron Hawk formation?

this is my preferred option - 4 iron hawks in a unit, priced at 200pts or 175pts at the minimum.

#2. Overlord Pricing: These were changed to 250 each, with 225 for each additional. The question remains though if this price change was enough to balance the Overlords. It was also suggested that the stats be simplified to show three battlecannons with a left arc and three with a right arc. It will make getting a firing solution slightly more difficult for all six battlecannons because you could only bring all six guns to bear on the target if it was pointed dead on, but I am fine with that. It would be more realistic and the only noticeable effect will be for sustain fire orders.

no change to points - switch to 3 battlecannons on left & right seems reasonable.

#3. Thunderfire Pricing and Armament: Currently the stats are at 0cm move, AV, 5+ Armor, CC - , FF6+, 60cm AA4+, 75cm AP3+/AT3+ Twin Battlecannon. Two for 100 points.

Only change would be to alter them to LV, no price change as it makes them more fragile. The suggestion of taking 6 formations made me chuckle - u suddenly have a chunk of the army thats very static. EA is a game of movement as u need to be able to claim objectives and be in opposite side of the battlefield to secure a win.

#4. Cyclops Missiles: Are the Cyclops missiles superfluous? Right now they are 90cm 6 x 1BP each (one-shots), indirect fire. A suggestion has been made to have them changed to AT shots (AT2+ or AT3+) and losing the indirect fire. Finally, I am considering lowering it from 5 shields to 4 shields.
I’m not keen on losing the indirect fire only because these are missiles mounted on a 45 degree angle. Clearly the design was to have them fire indirect. But the thought process of making the Cyclops more of a WE hunter is a decent enough suggestion to warrant further discussion. Personally, I like the Cyclops, but I will admit the missiles have had negligible impact on my games. Is the Cyclops too inexpensive as is? Currently it is 475 and I have committed to sending it to the 500 point mark. Will that do?

alter points to 500 pts rather than drop shields to 4. Leave missiles as they are - most Squat WE are multi-role beasties, they can deliver hurt by various means. I think the missiles dont get as much use as the Cyclops is all about the Hellfury so missiles can easily be overlooked.

#5. Robot Changes: I am changing them from LVs to AV Walkers. With the price at 225, however, does the Robot formation look any more attractive compared to the Bikers Guild at the same price? Do we need to lower the price on the Robots to 200, even with the AV walker status? Do they need a price bump to 250 or 275? Once again, take a look at the other 225 point formations (Bikes and Thudd Guns) and honestly ask yourself if you think the AV Robots are better, worse, or similar in value.

i would prefer AV and drop points to 200. When compared to other 225 point formations they are not as useful, they are slow (cant march and MV 10cm) so cant move about and threaten like the Bikers can (especially when u add in trikes with their MW weapons) and cant reach out and touch someone like the Thudd Guns...

#6. Land Train issues: After reviewing the cars, I agree that there is a problem with the prices and/or armament on the Mortar Battle Car (currently 75 points) and Bomb Battle Car (currently 100 points).

The Rad Bomb is a one-shot 4BP disrupt weapon for 100 points, but Tim is correct that few people will bring it because the Doomsday Cannon (MW) fired with the Rad Bomb will cancel out both special rules and leave you with a 7BP regular shot. Now that is a decent BP load, but not for 100 points and not for 1 shot.

Suggestion #1: 1BP MW. Remove the one-shot (there could be other bombs in the car). It ends up being a BP boost to the doomsday cannon that will increase it to 4BP, adding that well desired extra template. Price? 50-75 points?

my preferred option - cost at 50 pts.

Mortar Battle Cannon is currently armed with 45cm 2BP Indirect Fire, Ignore Cover, Slow-Firing. It was modeled off the armament for the Imperial Guard Bombard.

Suggestion #2: Model it from the Imperial Guard Griffon instead. Heavy Mortar 30cm 1BP Indirect Fire. Heck, it can even come with a Heavy Bolter as well (30cm AP5+). What would this thing be worth? 50 points? 25 points?

I prefer this option - 50 points seems fair when u factor in the void shield.

_________________
May your tankard never be dry and the Dice Gods look favourably upon your endeavours!

Bump.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

I haven't actually played with squats (will do tonight) yet so take this with a pinch of salt.

#1. Scout deficiency:
option 4: no change. It adds flavour to the army. So long as it is not a crippeling flaw to the list, it's fine.

Berserker Option:
A bunch of pure CC troops seem ill suited to the task.

Tarantula Option:
apart from being able to operate apart from the main force they lack movement and character for the role. Mechanics aside, how do they actually scout? They are autonomous sentry guns. Not likely candidates to be sending reports on enemy troop movements


Iron Hawk Option:
I don't get this unit. and I don't have a model for it. Why does it exist on the list? Why not fold it back into iron eagle for sake of keeping the list simple?
Having said that, Iron eagles (or whatevers) as scouts would be ok. Though they are flying tanks, the idea of them keeping tabs on the enemy, treehopping as they go in a loose formation makes a certain ammount of sense. Slaanesh knights are pretty heavy scouts too. heavily armed anyway.

2,3,4:
No opinion as of yet. I'll have to get back to you on these points

#5. Robot Changes:
comparing them to SM dreds they look a tad expensive on paper. running with them tonight @225 ffor AV walkers so I'll see how they do.

#6. Land Train issues:
I've always considered the mortar to be more akin to a doomsday cannon than a bombard myself. Having the stats similar to the bombard is a good idea but squats do have different, superior even, technology so it doesn't have to be the same gun.
I propose a 1bp MW for the mortar at 90cm (or even 120) so we can go haywire with the bomb battlecar.
Maybe bring that back in line with the original Epic 2nd and you can have it chuck a single shot big template at 2BP IC. Downside is it would have to have a special rule written to keep the radbomb seperate from the other barrage.
Radbomb: The radbomb is a lowyield nuclear missile with it's own guidance system. It never combines with other barrages.
Dunno about points values though

#7. Tunneler issues:
I own a stack of these (unpainted as of yet) but I'd make the rules as similar to teleport as possible to keep things simple.

just my 2 eurocents worth

_________________
----------------------------------------------------------------
Chaos LatD
Squats
Imperial fists
Steel Legion
Black Legion

True, but I'll point you to Feral Orks that have Trappas (Wildboyz with the Scout ability)

However, to counter my own point I have never seen them used outside of my own testing. I certainly don't use them in tournaments.

Further point the CC & FF stats in the compendium are the wrong way around CC 4+, FF 6+ are the correct way.