Page 2 of 7

[ 102 posts ]

Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

Updated force list, phase one
HecklerMD	Post subject: Updated force list, phase one Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 9:25 am
Brood Brother Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 5:42 am Posts: 201	Crisis as LV, IMO, is the single most glaring flaw in this list.  In 40K, Crisis are a flagship unit, iconic of the Tau, and in E:A they are a cadre choice.  The speed and mobility they display sets them apart from other armies powered armor.  In 40K, terrain protects and enhances them.  In Epic, now, terrain inhibits and threatens them.  The increase in scale should not mean that unique aspects of the unit should have an inverse function all of a sudden!  Stealthsuits do not become more visable from a distance!  As such, Crisis Suits need to be un-borked, pronto. As one of the two main core choices (AMHC being experimental) if we dont get this one right it will put preassure on newer Tau players to go FW cadre and limits how the Tau play.  I, for one, and building a Tau army to try new ways to play Epic, and at considerable cost.  Tanks and Mech Inf I can play in the IG and not buy expensive resin to do so.  Crisis are unique. IA3 pegs the XV8 at 2.8 Meters/9.19 Feet Tall, and it is able to move fluidly and gracefully leap about, and yet it is called a vehicle, therefore unable to manuver as such and take advantage of cover.  GW Pegs A SM Terminator at 2.1 Meters/7 Feet tall, and it is able to move purposefully and in a frankenstine-ish manner and can fall off the edge of most any surface that can support it, and it is called infantry. It can be argued that, in the ability to move in a manner that allows them to take advantage of cover as Infantry do, both Crisis Suits and Terminators are equal, certenly equal enough for Epic scale, so the deciding/justifying factor seems to come down to size.  The few circumstances that a XV8 might find itself unable to gain cover as infantry would are more than balanced out by its enhanced mobility (Cant fit in door, jump over wall!) and its bulk (Crash through wall!), and firepower (Blow hole in wall!). Now a Kroot is taller than a Termie, at 2.3 Meters / 7.55 Feet (according to IA3) but nobodys gonna take Inf from them. Are Crisis Suits so big, that extra 2 feet towering over Termies, that they...just...cant..seem...to..unf...squeeze... into a RIVER? The point I'm trying to make is in relation to Impassable terrain and Vehicles.  XV8s and maybe even 88s should be able to enter and leave the same terrain as infantry do because they are infantry, battlesuited infantry yes, just like terminators and Nobz and 'Eavy Armored Nobz and WraithGuard (sorta), infantry all.  Battlesuits, Powered Armor, but not vehicles.  At all. If you MUST call them LV, then give them this: "Tau Walker:  Units with Tau Walker treat all Impassable terrain as Dangerous (Except Cliffs, which remain Impassable), and may re-roll failed dangerous terrain checks as per the Walker special ability." That way you can blast them with you bolters AND your lascannons, but they can still use terrain like they should. BUT, I KNOW WE DONT WANT ANY NEW SPECIAL RULES!!  So forget that! We should err on the side of caution with this critical core choice and make them Infantry. And do it soon before I call in my next Forgeworld order!
Top

asaura	Post subject: Updated force list, phase one Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 10:54 am
Brood Brother Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 11:34 am Posts: 481	Quote (HecklerMD @ 17 Nov. 2005 (08:25)) As one of the two main core choices (AMHC being experimental) if we dont get this one right it will put preassure on newer Tau players to go FW cadre and limits how the Tau play. ?I, for one, and building a Tau army to try new ways to play Epic, and at considerable cost. ?Tanks and Mech Inf I can play in the IG and not buy expensive resin to do so. ?Crisis are unique. Crisis and Broadsides are still good units when they're LV. The world won't end whichever way we model them.
Top

Steele	Post subject: Updated force list, phase one Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 11:03 am
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am Posts: 423 Location: Duisburg , Germany	Quote (asaura @ 17 Nov. 2005 (10:54)) Quote (HecklerMD @ 17 Nov. 2005 (08:25)) As one of the two main core choices (AMHC being experimental) if we dont get this one right it will put preassure on newer Tau players to go FW cadre and limits how the Tau play. ?I, for one, and building a Tau army to try new ways to play Epic, and at considerable cost. ?Tanks and Mech Inf I can play in the IG and not buy expensive resin to do so. ?Crisis are unique. Crisis and Broadsides are still good units when they're LV. The world won't end whichever way we model them. That is correct, in fact while I played them as LV my opponents thought that they are Inf. and were surprised they aren?t. But still, as we already discussed that matter a lot and invested much time, why should we again switch it? It seems so much effort wasted for nothing. In the end , whichever way we decide to take, we won?t die. cheers! Steele _________________ Quid pro Quo
Top

nealhunt	Post subject: Updated force list, phase one Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 3:43 pm
Purestrain Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm Posts: 9617 Location: Nashville, TN, USA	Heckler:  As I've said, Crisis would be okay as infantry to me for more or less exactly the reasons you stated.  The mobility/flexibility issue doesn't apply to Broadsides, though. Tactica:  There is a majority on this board, but literally every single person I know personally that plays both 40K and Epic share my opinion.  I also know of a couple active playtesters who don't/won't post here for various reasons who have similar concerns. _________________ Neal
Top

baronpiero

Post subject: Updated force list, phase one Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 6:34 pm

Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 1:38 pm Posts: 186

About Crisis. I appreciate the addition of Walkers. It is already a great step forward, and the minimum to make Crisis able to negociate ruins and rubbles as would a jump-packed Revenant Titan. AsausaCrisis and Broadsides are still good units when they're LV. The world won't end whichever way we model them That's quite true. LV/inf does not change much things from a resilience point of view. It just tends to make Crisis more vulnerable to weapons that are better at AT than AP, and that's not the vast majority of weapons. IMO, making them Walkers was the big step from a balance point of view. Changing them from "LV-Walkers" to "Inf" is a smaller step. My main grief against LV is that walker or not, Crisis are unable to enter buildings whereas they are supposed to take advantage from cover well. "Infantry" makes them consistent with other similarly sized creatures in Epic-Armageddon: Ogryns, Obliterators, Tyranid warriors,... Crisis can hide as well as those in 40K if not better (hit and run). The discussion on the specialist-games forum quite convinced me that Light-Vehicle should remain a special case of Vehicle. Making them infantry will also allow us to streamline the Drones special rule: no need for the drones to take AT anymore.

Top

Steele	Post subject: Updated force list, phase one Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 6:38 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am Posts: 423 Location: Duisburg , Germany	Quote (nealhunt @ 17 Nov. 2005 (15:43)) Tactica: ?There is a majority on this board, but literally every single person I know personally that plays both 40K and Epic share my opinion. ?I also know of a couple active playtesters who don't/won't post here for various reasons who have similar concerns. Someone stated that the most dangerous people are those that don?t share any thoughts but themselves. As it seems, the main fight is beeing between you and Tactica. It also seems that both of you won?t concede and have valid statements, beside others. Can?t we come to a single opinion? What if we change the Broadsides to LV, as they are the bulkier ones and only taken as Contingent choices, leaving the true Elite Warriors Infantry? For me , it doesn?t matter much , as I don?t care about 40k. It worked so far, beeing LV or not, though better when they were Infantry. Finally , the threat is the enemy, whether he wants to take out Infantry/LV out or he begins with the more threatening AV?s and/or SC?s, if they aren?t shot it doesn?t matter which type they are. so , I will use them in no other way as I used to - to beat the enemy. You will have losses, sooner or later....   Cheers! Steele _________________ Quid pro Quo
Top

clausewitz	Post subject: Updated force list, phase one Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 7:21 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm Posts: 916 Location: Glasgow, Scotland	I hesitated to get invovled in this debate as I haven't played 40K for years.  However, having used the Crisis as LV and as Inf in recent games I should say that although it didn't make a huge difference I prefered them as Inf.  Partly due to terrain and partly because it just didn't seem right that my Supreme Commander and associates were mounted in light vehicles.  Similarly it seems odd that Broadsides are described as light, with 4+RA they just seem too tough to be LV.  Thats all just IMO. This arguement has gone on over a few different threads, so please forgive me if what am I about to ask has been stated before. For those that believe Crisis and Broadsides should be LV: is this a balance issue?  If so, why does making them infantry make them unbalanced? If its not a balance issue and just to do with how the 40K stats should be converted then I will have to accept whatever end result is chosen as I can't help on that.
Top

nealhunt

Post subject: Updated force list, phase one Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 8:02 pm

Purestrain Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm Posts: 9617 Location: Nashville, TN, USA

Someone stated that the most dangerous people are those that don?t share any thoughts but themselves. They share plenty, just not here.  An example of what I'm talking about is Pixelgeek, who was quite clearly made unwelcome.  That's fine and I fully agree he brough on a large amount of it himself.  (Incidentally, he also knows that and agrees.) I'll try to encourage those I know about to contact CS directly with comments, but despite the fact that most of us find Epicomms to be a fine and hopsitable community, not everyone with a valuable opinion feels likewise. As it seems, the main fight is beeing between you and Tactica.  It also seems that both of you won?t concede and have valid statements,

Heh.  You're right that neither of us will concede.  Part of dealing with hobbies is that people are often extraordinarily emotionally attached.  Check out the AMTL discussions for a great example of where there is no possible middle ground between opinions.

Nonetheless, I do recognize many of his arguments as valid and said as much.  On this issue I changed position on the Crisis suits and we have both done likewise on many other issues.  He and I agree on probably the majority of items that have come under discussion.  This is just a hot button for both of us.