Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

E&C's Ad-Mech Tech Guard Concept.

 Post subject: E&C's Ad-Mech Tech Guard Concept.
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 12:37 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
The concept:

- Carapace armoured Skitarii as the core of the army.
- Not too different from the IG lists, but with its own distinct feel.
- No Commissars (The Ad-Mech wouldn't allow them in their armies!) == consequent lack of inspiring.
- High tech units like Ordinatii & Tunnelers.
- Limited access to Knights (Probably only one generic Knight type)

Click for conceptual force-org


Trash?

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: E&C's Ad-Mech Tech Guard Concept.
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 4:59 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 1189
Looks pretty neat. Though I'd like to see the Super Heavy Tank Company move to a core company for the list. To me, at least, lots of super heavy tanks/vehicles ought to be a hallmark of the Ad-Mech, where as lots of infantry should be the IG's thing. Maybe (shock and awe) move the Demi-Century to the support area and the Russ Company (Maybe superheavies) to core? Just seems to fit, IMHO, that the Ad Mech should field some of the best equipped forces in the Imperium. They do -make- the stuff, after all!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: E&C's Ad-Mech Tech Guard Concept.
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 9:34 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 8:59 pm
Posts: 1212
Location: Finland
Why just not use activation tunnel, and remove formation from table, and next turn give them teleport?

_________________
Rats Keep Running...

Dark Eldar Dracon


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: E&C's Ad-Mech Tech Guard Concept.
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 10:00 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
The skitari i have always envisaged is a core of WE supported by a horde of infantry - reflecting the way the ad mech sees the solution to problems. Not the horde of mech like the core uard list, but instead WE supported by infantry with some other stuff.

Saying that I think each list should be themed to a forgeworld. Ryza would be lots of vehicles with plasma, etc etc.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: E&C's Ad-Mech Tech Guard Concept.
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 10:26 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 1189
For the tunneler rules... Wouldn't the simplest way to do it be to just give them Free Planetfall? They're not really planetfalling, but it functions similarly. Maybe with some turn restriction based on how far from your board edge they're due to deploy or something, but don't think that's really necessary either. Let the tunnelers start the game off-board. The small ones just give Free Planetfall, the large ones have Free Planetfall and stick around to add fire support. That way if you want to use them like space marine drop pods with then just being 'token's you can for the small ones!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: E&C's Ad-Mech Tech Guard Concept.
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 11:00 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

(Hena @ Nov. 16 2007,07:47)
QUOTE
I would make the Tank Company to be similar to IG list. So free vanquisher (or Executioner) and cost to 650.

I've always found that highly dumb.

Either you have an option that is paid for (Vanquisher), or you have it built into the basic cost of the formation.

The current situation has a 'free' upgrade to a Vanquisher, which is qualitatively superior (All stats are the same except it has a better AT weapon)... it's stupid.

Also that list seriously needs to have at least Leviathan. Possibly Capitol Imperialis as well.


Yep.


Why new set of Tunneler rules?

Because the rulebook's tunneler rules:

a- Don't let players use the cool cradle models (Which they could be deployed on under these rules).

b- Don't let players tunnel multiple times.

And those rules are confusing.

They don't appear to be, being as you understood the rule perfectly.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: E&C's Ad-Mech Tech Guard Concept.
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 11:15 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

(The_Real_Chris @ Nov. 16 2007,09:00)
QUOTE
The skitari i have always envisaged is a core of WE supported by a horde of infantry - reflecting the way the ad mech sees the solution to problems. Not the horde of mech like the core uard list, but instead WE supported by infantry with some other stuff.

So, no core infantry formation at all?

For me, the most distinctive thing about Skitarii is that :

- They all have better armour and equipment than other IG regiments.
- They are virtually without number (As literally billions of Skitarii would be present on each Forgeworld).


I was looking at using the structure of the list to encourage the player to use lots of War Engines to roll alongside their Skitarii, but that the enhanced soliders themselves would be nominally the core (Even if players will inevitably spend most of their points on bigger stuff!).

Saying that I think each list should be themed to a forgeworld. Ryza would be lots of vehicles with plasma, etc etc.


I'd like to see theming like that allowed by the basic list (Ie: The Tank Company command tank upgrade allows you to choose either a Vanquisher or an Executioner... that being Gryphonne IV or Ryza-themed... the same with the super-heavy tanks...). I don't think it's nessesary to make a seperate list for each Forgeworld style to account for relatively minor differences in their ORBAT.





_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: E&C's Ad-Mech Tech Guard Concept.
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 12:28 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 7:52 am
Posts: 10348
Location: Malta
Looks good - might be a post-postgrad project for me - at least if I manage to find the models for it.

A couple of comments (not necessarily suggestions):
1 - would Ad Mech have access to Space Marine vehicles, or are they built exclusively in SM forges? For a spot of change from the IG, it would be nice to have Rhinos for the troops instead of Chimeras. Those and the Vindies 9not for firepower, but for troop support different from IG) would be nice to have. Mind you, Land Transporters instead of chimerae would be good, too.
2 - Something I would love to see would be hordes of cheap Ad Mech slaves - non-servitors, providing manual labour for the forgeworlds. Hopeless troops, but cheap and cheerful.
3 - I can't help but think of Sentinels used for recce as being too military for an Ad Mech force. I;d have eliminated them entirely but for the power-grab Sentinel made by FW.
4 - Knights - spot of collaboration with the Knights list - could be taken as a unit of 3, these being chosen from the knights list and paid for at the cost given there.
5 - I'd love to see a new vehicle type added, but this would be messing up things too far. What I'm thinking of is a Chaos type war engine, except that in this case it would be a machine used for industrial purposes (and dedicated to the Machine god) converted to a more combattive role in emergencies. Perhaps the unadulterated Chaos war engine rules could be used? Dunno - wouldn't like to ad a new unit type, anyway.

_________________
Back from oblivion (again)?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: E&C's Ad-Mech Tech Guard Concept.
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 1:19 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:50 am
Posts: 1189
While infantry for the Ad Mech would be fairly plentiful, I don't think they'd be the core force-of-choice for the Ad Mech, to be honest. Considering that most Forge Worlds are described as being incredibly inhospitable and often times polluted so bad that it's near lethal just to leave the forges without proper protection. They are, after all, entire planets which exist essentially as production and research facilities! Combine this with them having the easiest access to super heavy vehicles and tanks and I wouldn't expect to see large numbers of infantry in the Ad Mech's usage except in specialized roles. Things like hellbore crews, praetorians  for holding down terrain, maybe some servitors as a shambling mass which provides firepower. But not as the central part of the army... Definitely with Chris on this one: The core of the Ad Mech tech guard should definitely be their superheavy vehicles. If only as a way to set them apart from the IG. Giving them a wider selection of said vehicles would seem to make sense too. Given that they are the ones who build them!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: E&C's Ad-Mech Tech Guard Concept.
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 2:42 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 1:33 am
Posts: 340
I don't like the inclusion of the Ordinatus as they are much too powerful as the rules stand. remember you used one against me and it destroyed my army pretty much on its own in one and a half turns.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: E&C's Ad-Mech Tech Guard Concept.
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 2:44 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

(Jstr19 @ Nov. 16 2007,13:42)
QUOTE
I don't like the inclusion of the Ordinatus as they are much too powerful as the rules stand. remember you used one against me and it destroyed my army pretty much on its own in one and a half turns.

That was your fault for condencing four formations into one 20cm square area whilst knowing the Ordinatus was arriving from reserves next turn... :D

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: E&C's Ad-Mech Tech Guard Concept.
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 3:46 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
I have to admit my sense of the infantry/vehicle proportions are similar to what others have said.

Just some questions:

How much can be spent on titan/air "allies"?

Are Ordinati part of that allocation, or can they be purchased normally?  Should they be 0-1 per type?  0-1 per army?

Why is orbital support a normal formation instead of being part of the allies contingent?

Why LV for the Praetorians?  My skitarii background knowledge is poor, but the servitors in the 40K SM codex wouldn't warrant LV status.  Are Praetorians a lot different?

===

Tunnelers.  *sigh* Sadly, they're just problematic...

Does the "tunnel" action allow any other activity?  Do the cradles have any role beyond decoration?

When do they "arrive" - beginning of the turn?  On activation?  Is there scatter?

How do the tunnelers activate when they emerge, i.e. does emerging count as movement for the purposes of being able to Sustain or OW?  

What happens when a couple tunnelers are killed?  Since they have 0cm surface move is the formation locked in place (or forced to leave units behind to move or tunnel again)?

What is the justification for the "tunnel again" ability?  I thought part of the purpose of the cradles was to launch them?  If they can self-launch, why bother with cradles (in the game - they would have non-combat logistical use, obviously).

Tunneling as you wrote it is basically a march move with invulnerability during the move.  It's certainly useful, but it also has a lot of downsides - the only movement is via this march, it can't fire and move at the same time, any move at all takes 2+ turns to complete.  I think they could almost be free based on the drawbacks, but in any case they are definitely not worth 10+ points per unit.

===

Right now, my best shot at Tunnelers is:

Free Planetfall, with the restrictions on deployment times from the book tunneler rules (your side of the board, any time; enemy side of the board, Turn 3+).

Transported formations are separate so they can move away.

Tunneler units remain in place and function like buildings in various scenario rules - no activation, only defend themselves in assaults - except they can capture/contest objectives.

But I haven't had a chance to test them, so I don't know how practical it is.

_________________
Neal


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: E&C's Ad-Mech Tech Guard Concept.
PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 4:04 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
How much can be spent on titan/air "allies"?


33% of the army as normal.

Are Ordinati part of that allocation, or can they be purchased normally?  Should they be 0-1 per type?  0-1 per army?

I was looking at having them 0-1 per army, and *not* part of the allies.

Why is orbital support a normal formation instead of being part of the allies contingent?

Because it's a normal formation for the IG lists, I didn't see any reason to make it more limited.

Why LV for the Praetorians?  My skitarii background knowledge is poor, but the servitors in the 40K SM codex wouldn't warrant LV status.  Are Praetorians a lot different?

I was going off of the rather large robot models... infantry status is fine too!




Tunnelers.  *sigh* Sadly, they're just problematic...

They are, let's see if we can sort them out!

Does the "tunnel" action allow any other activity?  Do the cradles have any role beyond decoration?

I was thinking that the cradles could be handled as a seperate formation, ala Deathstrikes after they have fired their missiles they would pretty much be heavy bolter-trucks (Though Mole & Hellbore trucks would be War Engines in their own right).

When do they "arrive" - beginning of the turn?  On activation?  Is there scatter?

Begining of the turn, with no scatter as-written (Though the free planetfall mechanic makes sense to use here).

How do the tunnelers activate when they emerge, i.e. does emerging count as movement for the purposes of being able to Sustain or OW?  

It would be an equivilent kind of action to Teleporting. If the infantry onboard wish to disembark and make use of an action that allows movement when they are activated, they'll trigger OW normally.

What happens when a couple tunnelers are killed?  Since they have 0cm surface move is the formation locked in place (or forced to leave units behind to move or tunnel again)?

You're spot on there.

The Tunneler vehicles themselves could perhaps gain disposable, which would allow the infantry formation to leave them behind harmlessly, but if one termite are destroyed and the formation tunnels... any infantry left on the surface will be left behind and apply BM's.

What is the justification for the "tunnel again" ability?  I thought part of the purpose of the cradles was to launch them?  If they can self-launch, why bother with cradles (in the game - they would have non-combat logistical use, obviously).

Imagine the tunnelers emerging like the old Termite models, only half way out of the ground... they reverse back into their tunnel a little way, then alter their course and plow onwards under the earth.

Tunneling as you wrote it is basically a march move with invulnerability during the move.  It's certainly useful, but it also has a lot of downsides - the only movement is via this march, it can't fire and move at the same time, any move at all takes 2+ turns to complete.
If you move less than 75cm, you'll emerge at the begining of the next turn, and be able to Engage or the like.

IE:
-During Turn 1, tunneler formation 'tunnels' a distance of 60cm.
-Start of Turn 2, tunneler formation emerges.
- During Turn 2, tunneler formation Engages.

As written, you can't Sustain Fire after tunneling because the infantry onboard are not allowed to emerge when the tunnelers surface until they take an action that allows movement.

I think they could almost be free based on the drawbacks, but in any case they are definitely not worth 10+ points per unit.

You do lose a turn of shooting, but on the other hand, you're completely immune to enemy fire until the start of the next turn, and your opponent doesn't know where you are going to re-emerge!.





_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: E&C's Ad-Mech Tech Guard Concept.
PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2007 6:21 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2004 6:42 pm
Posts: 3305
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
Would n't mind seeing SHT's being company choice.
How about adding LR variants? Maybe not as company choice but in 3=strong upgrade?

Cheers

James

_________________
My TOEG- Blood Angels and Deathbolts
My Painting Blog- Evil Sunz, Goffs
My Epic trades list


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


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