Page 2 of 2

[ 24 posts ]

Go to page Previous  1, 2

Ulthwe overdone for price
MC23	Post subject: Ulthwe overdone for price Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 7:33 am
Brood Brother Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:27 am Posts: 174	Quote (code_ronin @ 04 Feb. 2006 (21:24)) When are all of these changes supposed to come down, start being discussed, etc.? Thanks. Discussion starts now _________________ I am MC23
Top

woodelf_dave	Post subject: Ulthwe overdone for price Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:25 am
Brood Brother Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 12:27 pm Posts: 72 Location: Edinburgh	I agree with code_ronin that removing all the discount on Saim-Hann bike units will effectively remove what makes SH so unique - namely large jetbike formations. ? Opponents, certainly in my gaming circles expect large jetbike formations. Its what expected. ?Clearly though they need to be balanced in cost. ?I think the main problem comes with the 1+ activations. Single Jetbike formations are not really the issue. ?Its the ease with which Saim-Hann can manouver two or more such units to engage a single enemy formation that my group feels is the biggest problem. I think putting the points up slightly (see earlier threads), putting the initiative on Windrider hosts back to 2+ and perhaps even knocking the strategy rating of the army back to 3 will be the answer. ? In this way, the jetbike formations effectively get slightly smaller but critically it would be much harder to guarantee a) getting that crucial first activation in the game turn and b) actually activating those units you have so carefully got into place for a combined assault.
Top

Chroma	Post subject: Ulthwe overdone for price Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 3:07 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm Posts: 9684 Location: Montréal, QC, Canada	Quote (Markconz @ 05 Feb. 2006 (11:46)) SR 5 I have always found to be over the top. The only reason it seems to be over the top is that they aren't paying for it.  They have all the Eldar special rules, plus more, for the same price, that is the *only* issue with it. The playtesting I have done here has shown that to be about a 10% advantage, simple as that.  It's an easy and elegant solution and basically solves the problem, so I don't understand the resistance to it. It is entirely appropriate for Ulthw? to have SR5, with their constant scrying and farseeing, just as it is entirely appropriate for Saim-Hann to have SR3 to represent their wildness.  It adds character and variation between the lists beyond just unit organization and I, for one, think that's really cool and something missing in other "variant" lists. Basically every Ulthw? player I know (two others... *laugh*, but I get this feeling from most board members I see writing about it, or playing against Ulthw?) feel there is something a little "over the top" with Ulthw?.  When, through playtesting, you find things are like that you either change stats or change points; to keep the character of Ulthw?, why not just try changing points? Give it a try!  Convert a couple of your Ulthw? armies to the following point values, I've done it, and I tend to lose a formation or two and might be off by 5-10 points, which means less activations to balance the better SR.   All "upgrade" point values remain the same. Ulthw? Armylist Avatar  - 0 points 0-1 Wraithgate - 55 points 0-1 Seer Council - 65 points Warhosts Guardian Warhost - 165 points Black Guardian Warhost  - 225 points Troupes Aspect Warrior Troupe - 165 points Ranger Troupe - 30 points per Ranger War Walker Troupe - 225 points Windrider Troupe - 225 points Falcon Troupe - 275 points Fire Prism Troupe - 275 points Nightspinner Troupe - 200 points Engine of Vaul - 275 points Spacecraft, Titans, and Aircraft 0-1 Eldar Spacecraft: Wraithship - 165 points, Dragonship - 325 points 0-1 Warlock Titan - 925 points Phanton Titan - 825 points Revenant Titans - 725 points Night Wings - 325 points Phoenix Bombers - 450 points Vampire Raider - 225 points _________________ "EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
Top

semajnollissor	Post subject: Ulthwe overdone for price Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 7:56 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm Posts: 1673 Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA	I agree with Chroma, why is there so much resistance to raising the cost of the formations? My point of view is that if Ulthwe players absolutely want SR5, then they should be able to have it (as long as they give up something equivalent in trade). Point costs are as fair a way as any to make up for the advantage that SR5 gives. As for the spirit stones, what I want to know is, why does it have to be an "all-or-nothing" situation? I mean, spirit stones do make certain formations much more resiliant than they need to be, but spirit stone also change some formations from questionable to useful. The origin of the rule was that there were several formations in the list whose usefulness were drastically reduced after the first turn. As I recall. those formation were the small armour squadrons. So I propose one of two solutions. My first alternative is to change the rule from a general blanket rule to a specialist rule (i.e. like sniper or leader). Reword the rule for fluff purposes, and attach the caveat that any formation where more than half of the units have the "spirit stones" rule can take off the extra BM. Then the rule would become a sort of distributed leader rule. My second alternative would be to change the rule to the following: Spirit Stones: Eldar vehicle crews are often assisted by the spirits of dead Eldar, which reside in a large spirit stone integrated into the wraithbone matrix of the vehicles. Because of this, Eldar vehicle crews can better focus on the overall battle, and are less prone to paniking in the face of oncoming fire. Any Eldar formation that consists entirely of non-fearless, non-war engine vehicles (LV or AV) may remove one extra blast marker whenever they rally in the end phase. Such a rule would drop every formation except the ones that really need it (in my opinion). Anyway, thats my 2 cents
Top

yme-loc	Post subject: Ulthwe overdone for price Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 5:37 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 4:58 pm Posts: 599	Quote (Chroma @ 05 Feb. 2006 (14:07)) Avatar ?- 0 points 0-1 Wraithgate - 55 points 0-1 Seer Council - 65 points Warhosts Guardian Warhost - 165 points Black Guardian Warhost ?- 225 points Troupes Aspect Warrior Troupe - 165 points Ranger Troupe - 30 points per Ranger War Walker Troupe - 225 points Windrider Troupe - 225 points Falcon Troupe - 275 points Fire Prism Troupe - 275 points Nightspinner Troupe - 200 points Engine of Vaul - 275 points Spacecraft, Titans, and Aircraft 0-1 Eldar Spacecraft: Wraithship - 165 points, Dragonship - 325 points 0-1 Warlock Titan - 925 points Phanton Titan - 825 points Revenant Titans - 725 points Night Wings - 325 points Phoenix Bombers - 450 points Vampire Raider - 225 points The problem with this sort of blanket points increase is that it is correct for some formations but not others. I cant believe phoenix bombers are worth 450pts even at strat 5, also why would rangers be more expensive. Those would be the most obvious example of problems with blanket changes, also Falcons should probably be 275pts and Revenants 700pts in the Biel -Tan list so would be 300 and 750-775 respectively in an ulthwe list using your idea. I still dont like it as a solution though, lots of different points values between similar lists is a bit strange and potentially confusing. _________________ Epic UK - Improving and Enhancing Epic Gaming in the UK [url]http://epic-uk.co.uk/wp[/url]
Top

Tactica

Post subject: Ulthwe overdone for price Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 8:01 pm

Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241

The problem with this sort of blanket points increase is that it is correct for some formations but not others. There are two things that drastically impact every unit in an army. 1) Strategy. 2) Initiative. If you are going to take a single formation out of the Black Legion list, and then give it +1 Init in the Khorne list - it should go up in price. If you are going to take an entire established army and give it a 'Strategy' incrase, then every unit in the army would be affected by the change. The entire army benefits from every table side choice, deployment side vs. angle choice in every turn roll off of every game against every opponent. ... lots of different points values between similar lists is a bit strange and potentially confusing.

Its only 'strange' if you are playing multiple lists.

I don't think this is a very good defense for not changing point costs. If one wishes to play multiple lists, the onus is upon them to learn multiple rules regardless of similarities.

One should of cousre avoid playing two lists that may personally cause them any confusion. However, development should not be limited by the potential for a given player to possibly generate confusion for playing two different lists.

Cheers,