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

ERC on Ulthw
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=5649		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  MC23 [ Tue Aug 09, 2005 12:49 pm ]
Post subject:  ERC on Ulthw
+++ I think Zac has a point with respect to the point cost.  The perception of ?something for nothing? is always a big problem, even if it makes a miniscule difference.  For those who have seen Chroma?s comments on both the SG and Epicomms boards, you can already see it happening.

 
Basically, if you are making a list for Guardians or a troupe-heavy list, Ulthwe is going to be better than the equivalent Biel Tan list, while Biel Tan makes better Aspect-oriented armies.  I think it?s pretty close, but it might be worth a few tweaks simply to manage perceptions.  Possibilities:

 
1)       List entries for Guardians/Black Guardians could be separated for clarity, since they can have 2 additional upgrades that a normal host cannot.

2)       +25 points onto the Black Guardian formations.
3)       +50 points for Farseer Counsel, rather than +25.  The Autarch is basically +50 for SC ability in the BT list and the Counsel is comparable.

 
The total change in points would probably be 100 points or less in a 3000 point army.  That?s only 3%, but I think it will make a big difference in perception. +++

 

Jervis
Author:  MC23 [ Tue Aug 09, 2005 12:50 pm ]
Post subject:  ERC on Ulthw
I am withholding my comments on this for a few days to give other people a chance to comment.
Author:  yme-loc [ Tue Aug 09, 2005 1:27 pm ]
Post subject:  ERC on Ulthw
I havnt really played with the Ulthwe list so my comments really only come from using Biel-Tan.

Jervis's comments seem pretty sensible to me its always a bad idea to give something for nothing and from a personal perspective I would never mind paying 25pts for 1+ Initiative.

Also +50 for the seer council seems fine (I'm a little surprised they wern't always this).

150pts for the aspect troupe's seems a little cheap to me they really are very flexible. I'd suggest 175pts, as they are I get the feeling I could design an ulthwe list that could out aspect a Biel-Tan list.

I do find the lack of cost for strategy 5 a little surprising, the strategy rating is actually a very important factor in a game and especially so for eldar, dont really know how it would be possible to factor this into the cost of ulthwe but I suspect it would be required.
Author:  Reaversbane [ Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:24 am ]
Post subject:  ERC on Ulthw
I normally (OK, always :cool: ) play Ulthwe, and I certainly wouldnt be bothered by these point adjustments. The argument seems logical and fair, so I'd happily adopt it. The something for nothing aspect did kinda bother me (especially as I have used 7+ Guardian warhosts in games before now...). I did think the 25 for the Seer Council was odd, and to be honest assumed it was a typo for a while and paid 50 anyway :O

Presumably the ratio of formations you can upgrade to Black Guardian status will remain the same (1/3)?
Author:  nealhunt [ Wed Aug 10, 2005 2:36 pm ]
Post subject:  ERC on Ulthw
For the record, I wrote that, not Jervis. :p

=====

I did spot one other problem/omission with the Avatar and I can't believe it hasn't come up before.

Court of the Young Kings is supposed to be Biel-Tan specific.  There should be a note and/or a UDS in the Units section that shows the Ulthwe Avatar does not get the CotYK attack.
Author:  Reaversbane [ Wed Aug 10, 2005 3:33 pm ]
Post subject:  ERC on Ulthw
OK, thats twice now there are issues I am sure have been discussed and agreed before, did we lose a version somewhere? I have been playing the Avatar without the CotYK for quite some time, and do remember it being discussed (along with whether Ulthwe should get the Spear Of Khaine, which was rejected), and fairly happily resolved. I suppose I could be imagining it? :p
Author:  Markconz [ Wed Aug 10, 2005 10:39 pm ]
Post subject:  ERC on Ulthw
Whoever is the rules champ - is there an estimated date for when the new Ulthwe list is coming out?
Author:  nealhunt [ Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:03 pm ]
Post subject:  ERC on Ulthw
It's been submitted to the ERC for approval.  I'm doing my best to push so that it comes out with the Black Legion and L&D lists as a sort of "Eye of Terror" release.
Author:  MC23 [ Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:23 am ]
Post subject:  ERC on Ulthw
Quote (nealhunt @ 10 2005 Aug.,09:36)
For the record, I wrote that, not Jervis. :p

=====

I did spot one other problem/omission with the Avatar and I can't believe it hasn't come up before.

Court of the Young Kings is supposed to be Biel-Tan specific.  There should be a note and/or a UDS in the Units section that shows the Ulthwe Avatar does not get the CotYK attack.

All references involving the Court of the Young King was removed many versions ago. Notes about using the CotYK attacks are in Swordwind. I thought even mentioning the CotYK would be more confusing than not mentioning it as they do not appear in the list.
Author:  MC23 [ Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:01 am ]
Post subject:  ERC on Ulthw
All right so I'm not waiting a few days like I said I would. Here's my response to these ideas.

1)       List entries for Guardians/Black Guardians could be separated for clarity, since they can have 2 additional upgrades that a normal host cannot.
As long as the list cost summary can be written on 1 page, no problem.

3)       +50 points for Farseer Counsel, rather than +25.  The Autarch is basically +50 for SC ability in the BT list and the Counsel is comparable.Also no problem. I would still pay for a Farseer Council at that cost.

2)       +25 points onto the Black Guardian formations.
No.


The problem to this is exactly the way it keeps getting addressed. "Looking at it..." but never has it been "playing with it". I was charged with bringing in a balanced army and even this token change will change how Ulthw? is fielded. I know this because I have played a great many games with Ulthw? after many games with Biel-Tan.

First of all is the cost issue. Many go on to ask (or ignore the rules) by thinking if you can pay for x why limit yourself. That will of course lead to Ulthw? not only being fielded in ways not intended but change their game balance as well. This is an uninteded consequence that will happen even though there is nothing to support it.

Second is that it's not worth it. I can always better spend that 25 to 50 points I'd now have to spend on Black Guardians on forces that will give me a much better return. The Initiative is a nice bonus but not critical (I'd go bak to using all Guardians when I Keep the Initiative instead of leading with them). The other options for Black Guardians are fun to play with but yet again, nothing critical. And I firmly think an option not worth taking is an option not worth offering.

Third is that comparing a Biel-Tan all Guardian army against an Ulthw? all Guardian army excuse is not proper. You should not be comparing Biel-Tan at its worst with Ulthw? at its best! The way point costs are determined in EPIC is not by their average use value but by the absolute best you can squeeze out them. The all Guardian Biel-Tan army is not exploiting Guardians to their fullest because they excel when they are in support of an Aspect Warhost which are designed to press an engagement. Biel-Tan's Guardians fragile nature is protected because they do not have to be an active member in those Engagements. Ulthw? on the other hand is pressured (I'd say required) to bring their Guardians directly into Engagements. Needless to say the life span and therefor the long term returns on Ulthw?'s Guardians is far less valuable in comparison. Real game play makes this far more evident than reading the list. If anything one can argue that Ulthw?'s Guardians should get a point reduction but that's what I thought the Increased Initiative and Strategy Rating was reflecting.

So yes I think that this little token cost for Black Guardians has far greater effect on Ulthw? than anybody on the ERC has fully considered. Now everyone is welcome to try to convince me otherwise before I send back the update.
Author:  Chroma [ Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:51 am ]
Post subject:  ERC on Ulthw
MC23, a question: ?Have you played many Biel-Tan vs Ulthwe games? ?

We've played 15+ games of that mix in my group, with various players using either army and Biel-Tan has not once beaten Ulthwe. ?There's been close games, but it's been straight wins (a few to tie-breaker) for Ulthwe. ?Biel-Tan with strong Aspect focus or with light, with lots of armour or with little; doesn't matter, it's been out-shot, out-maneuvered, and out activated.  The only times I've see Ulthwe lose in 2700 points is when they take Revenants as that really lessens their activations... and is sad, because those are sweet models.

What has been your experience in Eldar vs Eldar battles?
Author:  yme-loc [ Thu Aug 11, 2005 6:25 am ]
Post subject:  ERC on Ulthw
I would say that the +25 points here or there for black guardians really doesnt matter, and if it might lead to players not using them then dont go with it.

However having had more of a look at the ulthwe list over the last few days I would say that I am mightily concerned by that free strategy 5.

Also aspect troups should definetly be 175pts and prfererably limited to a max of one per guardian warhost.
Author:  Reaversbane [ Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:39 am ]
Post subject:  ERC on Ulthw
Chroma, those are scary odds. That degree of imbalance seems a little odd, was it the same person playing each army each time? I would consider some trend possible, with one army winning a little more than the other, but that dramatic an imbalance would seem to point to other factors?

MC23, I certainly dont feel the Black Guardians NEED to be paid for, they seem to be ok free, but in some way it would be good if there was some cost, otherwise the PERCEPTION of the list is skewed as you get something for nothing. You could always make he cost something slightly different? Black Guardian Warhosts don't have attached troupes? Or something, possibly quite minor. Especially as a lot of players feel the 4-strong aspect troupe is actually better than the 8-strong one.

The problem still remains that you could field identical armies of Biel-Tan and Ulthwe, and the Ulthwe army gets something for free. If the points costs should shape the way the army plays, then maybe Aspects should be 175 for a formation to discourage their use and represent their rarity? So then essentially you have Ulthwe get Init 1+ free and Biel-Tan get Exarchs free (relatively, if you get my point...).

Again, let me say I am happy with not paying any extra for Black Guardians, I just do not want to get stuck with the army ('cause I already have too many of the flippin' things painted...) that everyone thinks is unfair, when I dont object to paying the cost.
Author:  nealhunt [ Thu Aug 11, 2005 3:37 pm ]
Post subject:  ERC on Ulthw
The point here is not designing the list.  It's marketing the list.

Those suggestions are all based on managing perception in order to make it attractive and have little or nothing to do with the play balance or list design.

First of all is the cost issue. Many go on to ask (or ignore the rules) by thinking if you can pay for x why limit yourself.


If someone ignores the force org limitation, that's no different than someone ignoring the 33% air & titan limitation.  That would mean it's simply not a tournament legal force.  If someone wants to play that way in a friendly game, it makes no difference.

Second is that it's not worth it. I can always better spend that 25 to 50 points I'd now have to spend on Black Guardians on forces that will give me a much better return.

What you are balking over is no more than 75 points in a 3000 point army if you take a horde of guardians (7+ hosts).  Realistically, it's 25-50 points in a tournament army.

Again, the goal has nothing to do with actual balance (25-50 points in 3K is nothing).  It is all about managing the perception of "something for nothing."

If you think perception means little, consider how adamant your post was about a change of ~1.5% in cost.

Incidentally, as a side issue, I would like to hear your thoughts on not spending 25 points for a 300-500 point formation to gain an initiative bonus which is further amplified by Farsight abilities.  I would gladly pay it and call it a bargain.

Third is that comparing a Biel-Tan all Guardian army against an Ulthw? all Guardian army excuse is not proper.

I fully agree, but comparison with Biel Tan is unavoidable.  It is therefore best to manage it and give your list the best chance of being accepted by the general public.



Author:  Da Warboss [ Thu Aug 11, 2005 5:25 pm ]
Post subject:  ERC on Ulthw
why not compare a BT army of all aspects vs an Ulthwe of all Guardians..

If done properly I would think, despite being outnumbered 2-1, the BT could easily win. Warp Spiders, Howling Banshees, and Dark Reapers would easily destruct guardians..

Not that this helps deciding the extra points either way, but I think comparing strengths to weakness isn't as valid as comparing strengths to strenghths
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/