Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Falcons in Aspect Warhosts
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=11943		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  semajnollissor [ Mon Sep 24, 2007 10:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Falcons in Aspect Warhosts
Hey,

I was wondering how often you guys see the falcon transport upgrade taken for Aspect hosts.

I don't think I've ever seen them taken. For me, it's often a case where they seem like they would be a cool addition, but I can never justify reducing my number of activations.

Does anyone think they cost too much?
Author:  nealhunt [ Mon Sep 24, 2007 11:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Falcons in Aspect Warhosts
Almost never.

I've tried Reapers in Falcons (4 Falcons, w/ 2 Waveserpents for better armor saves out front) a few times.  I've been completely underwhelmed.  Supposedly, Firedragons in Falcons is a good combo of AT and MW but I've not tried that.

I've made the case many times that they're just too expensive.  They don't mesh well with infantry.  There's definitely no reason in my book that they should be 30% more expensive in the infantry formation.  That's before you get to the sheer point total of the formation.  It should be goood evidence there is a problem when you've not seen a Falcon-mounted Aspect host in any tournament list.

At this point I might try Falcons/Dragons in the troupe size as an alternative to a Falcon formation but there's no way I would have a 700 point infantry/armor Aspect host in an Eldar list.
Author:  Chroma [ Mon Sep 24, 2007 11:29 pm ]
Post subject:  Falcons in Aspect Warhosts

(semajnollissor @ Sep. 24 2007,22:46)
QUOTE
I was wondering how often you guys see the falcon transport upgrade taken for Aspect hosts.

I only ever take Falcons in Aspect Troupes... 4 Dark Reapers and 4 Falcons... 8 x AP5+ and  8 x AT4+ at 45cm whittles down many types of formations.
Author:  Irondeath [ Tue Sep 25, 2007 12:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Falcons in Aspect Warhosts
I have experimented with adding 2 Falcons to an Ulthw? Black Guardian formation, which felt moderately okay though not truly competetive.

The cost is steep though, as always when adding "real" AFV as infantry support. With no discount for the transports, the loss of activations and relative vulnerability via losing the tanks and with them mobility for the entire formation is discouraging.

I?ve felt the same way about adding the far tougher Land Raiders to CSM retinues, it?s hugely expensive and rarely works.

Still tempting though...  :;):
Author:  Flogus [ Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:23 am ]
Post subject:  Falcons in Aspect Warhosts
Any taxi-Falcons sighted since year 2007 (cf. last post here) ?

If this option is so unpopular, it's because it's too expensive. Let's give the taxi-Falcon the same price than the Sword of Vaul Falcon : 50pts, also the same price than Wave Serpent. A Falcon brings bigger firepower, but the Wave Serpent is more armoured and carries two infantry.

And for Alaitoc Ranger War Ost, with the 'standard' 65pts-taxi-Falcon, 4 Rangers + 4 Falcons cost 400pts (2*25pts for Rangers, 4*65pts for Falcons, so 40pts for allowing Falcons to guarnison).
With a 50pts-Falcon, what about 350pts for the same 4 Rangers + 4 Falcons ? (300pts of units and about the same guarnisonning fee as before)
Author:  Chroma [ Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:44 am ]
Post subject:  Falcons in Aspect Warhosts
The reduction in Falcon cost is something I'm definitely considering.

But one must also consider that, when added to an Aspect formation, they become a 1+ initiative formation, instead of the usual 2+.
Author:  Markconz [ Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:53 am ]
Post subject:  Falcons in Aspect Warhosts
Yeah I don't think I've taken them, maybe once or twice. Cost is prohibitive.
Author:  Ginger [ Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:30 am ]
Post subject:  Falcons in Aspect Warhosts
For what its worth, I have never seen them in the UK, and when I did try Guardians in '8' of them I was also underwhelmed. As others have said, at 820 for a basic Aspect host and 670 for Guardians they represent a lot of points for a relativly brittle formation.

However even when doubling this would kick out 16x AT5+ and 8x AP6+/AT6+ (or ~4.6 AT hits, ~1.3 AP hits) which will embarrass all but the toughest AV formations. With Dark Reapers and a couple of Fire Dragon Exarchs the AP fire and assault stats would be nasty as well. And at that size, you can afford to drop spare infantry when a tank dies.

Cutting the points to 50 each would drop this monster to 750 and 550 respectively, when I fancy you might see Guardian+Falcon formations tangling with Leman Russ, and I would not like to bet on the outcome. However, virtually any other formation would be toast.
Author:  Flogus [ Mon Feb 16, 2009 12:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Falcons in Aspect Warhosts
Quote: (Chroma @ 16 Feb. 2009, 03:44 )

But one must also consider that, when added to an Aspect formation, they become a 1+ initiative formation, instead of the usual 2+.

Right, I forgot that.

On the other hand, if the formation loose more Falcon than infantry, the formation is considerably slowed.
Author:  Malakai [ Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Falcons in Aspect Warhosts
I've never really understood why it is that only warmachines may transport troops outside of their own formation.

Couldn't Falcons pick up and drop off troops and just treat them as "intermingled" while on board?
Author:  nealhunt [ Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Falcons in Aspect Warhosts
Quote: (Malakai @ 16 Feb. 2009, 13:56 )

I've never really understood why it is that only warmachines may transport troops outside of their own formation.

Couldn't Falcons pick up and drop off troops and just treat them as "intermingled" while on board?

Using the WE transport rules as a generic "external transport" system would probably work from a mechanics perspective.  Overall, though, I don't see very many uses for it.

Transporting infantry in WEs seems primarily useful in terms of adding infantry to the WE formation rather than as a cool way to move infantry around.  Most non-WE transports are fragile enough that running around mounted is a bad tactical choice, even if it's just a first turn "start loaded and dump the infantry forward" move.  Mounted formations are subject to the whims of the transporting formation and breaking just the transports is obviously easier than breaking the combined formation so they would be even more vulnerable than just normal mounted formations, making it even worse.  Anyone but Eldar would tend to lose activations if they tried to embark or disembark from another formation.

What would you use external transport for?
Author:  Malakai [ Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Falcons in Aspect Warhosts
Quote: (nealhunt @ 16 Feb. 2009, 10:05 )

Quote: (Malakai @ 16 Feb. 2009, 13:56 )

I've never really understood why it is that only warmachines may transport troops outside of their own formation.

Couldn't Falcons pick up and drop off troops and just treat them as "intermingled" while on board?

Using the WE transport rules as a generic "external transport" system would probably work from a mechanics perspective.  Overall, though, I don't see very many uses for it.

What would you use external transport for?

The ability to pick up a unit, deposit them, and then be on your way to attack a target separate from the infantry formation sounds like a bonus to me.
Author:  nealhunt [ Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Falcons in Aspect Warhosts
Quote: (Malakai @ 16 Feb. 2009, 16:28 )

The ability to pick up a unit, deposit them, and then be on your way to attack a target separate from the infantry formation sounds like a bonus to me.

You can't do that with WE transports.  It takes a minimum of 2 activations in 2 separate turns to pick up and drop off infantry.  First, the mounting formations has to board using their action, then the combined/loaded WE can activate in the following turn.

If you allow joining/embarking and disembarking/breaking up in the same turn, it causes wonky results with every method anyone ever brainstormed on the playtest boards - formations double activating, moving faster than if they had organic transport, effectively free and unlimited combined assaults, etc..  Bad mojo.  You might be able to house rule it for friendly games, but no one could figure out a way to write hard rules for it that didn't have some sort of exploitable loophole.
Author:  Moscovian [ Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Falcons in Aspect Warhosts
I've run Falcons as transports, first as an experiment in just doing it.  It was just OK.  I later used it as a way of bumping the price of my Aspect formation so it wasn't the same price as another Aspect formation in Wave Serpents.  It's a great way to avoid having two BTS formations and the extra AT firepower is nice to have, even if it is on two units.  It isn's something I do regularly however.

With that said, I think the Eldar are flexible enough and might suffer success with a change to the pricing (and that goes for ALL the Eldar lists).
Author:  semajnollissor [ Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Falcons in Aspect Warhosts
How about using Falcons in the 4-strong aspect troupes in the alt-lists? That seems like a less points-restrictive option, but does it fair well?

For example, 2 shining spears, 2 dark reapers and 2 falcons. For 305 points, it doesn't seem that great, even if it has above average shooting ability.

So, does the point cost of a falcon as transport seem too high at both ends of the spectrum [small formation to big formation]? What about in the 6-strong formations of some of the other alt-lists?
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/