frogbear wrote:
Took a quck squiz at the list and have the following observations for change:
- Allies Costs that have "See War Gryphons list" : This is just lazy and annoying. You should not have to refer to another list for point values and datafaxes.
I don't have an issue with it, for the now. As the list solidifies into finality, it will be added. As the drive for balance in that regard is the domain of the AMTL list, I don't see a need to put the list through unnecessary changes as the AMTL list changes.
frogbear wrote:
- Senechal: Add one Senechal Character - This infers that you add the character yet the datafax would indicate that you upgrade a unit? I think the wording should be fixed in regards to this one.
I don't understand your confusion here. Sure, I could add "to a unit in the formation" to the end, like the NetEA Marine list, but the wording is essentially no different to the wording for Oddboyz in the NetEA Ork list, and there hasn't been any confusion there. Characters always add to a unit.
frogbear wrote:
*OPINION WARNING*
- Senechal: 50 points to gain Inspiring, Leader and Commander. Too cheap. Playtest at 100 points and then go from there. The formation that it joins gains more than a 50 point bonus from it's inclusion. Inspiring and Leader alone for such formations are worth at least 75 points. I would question whether Inspiring is actually warranted for this character. A Senechal would not be as Inspiring as a Baron. Effectively what you are doing is giving a cheap Inspiring to every formation.
100pts is completely ambit. 75pts could be considered if playtesting proves it too much. Where are you getting your numbers that 75pts is a fair number? Marines pay 50pts for Inspiring and Leader and +1MW. Eldar pay 25pts for Inspiring and +1MW (or +1EAFF). You need to take into account the small numbers of the formation (or a hefty price)*, the lack of air deployment/teleport**, a loss in an assault is going to hurt due to per cost issues***, and most importantly, a 2+ Initiative****. The latter is probably the most important penalty for an assault based formation.
* Opponent should be able to gain numbers bonus.
** Opponent should be able to gain BM bonus.
*** Each point opponent wins by is a 75pt unit gone.
**** Failure to activate (~17% minimum) means doing a lot less.
frogbear wrote:
*OPINION WARNING*
- Ballista AA Gun : I have an issue with these as they seem to be there as a cheap activation. I know they have 0 move, yet with such an army, they are more effective than what such an arguement would indicate. Why do they have to be emplacements? How do they get to the battle? Knights are known for going on the march. What are Ballista AA Guns doing out on a battlefield if they do not move? Can't you make these some type of vehicle with movement and have them priced accordingly? Same with the Howitzers.
A cheap activation, sure. A useful one, not so much. They get looked at funny in an Assault, and they get wiped out. As for background reasonings, it's no different to a Siegemaster list. The weapons are towed into position, and the carriers depart. I might include a transport option for them, like the Siegemasters, but it seems unnecessary at this point. The "cheap activation" issue is mostly muted by both the inability to spam (the 1:1 core/non-core ratio), and having better options available. Thunderbolts and Marauders are already a close deal. Any increase in cost here puts them outside the realm of playability.
Morgan Vening
- Knightworld Sub-Champion
Same as I renamed the Baron's Power Lance to Baron Lance due to differing values.
