Reviewing the Core List |
|
MC23
|
Post subject: Reviewing the Core List  Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 6:14 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:27 am
Posts: 174
|
|
So now I'm at a complete impass on the sub lists. What we should do now is pinpoint every exact thing we can identify as a possible problem with the core list. This is for Beil-Tan as well as how the translate into the other Craftworlds.
_________________
I am MC23
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
semajnollissor
|
Post subject: Reviewing the Core List Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 3:21 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm
Posts: 1673
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA
|
|
Revenants seem to be too cheap. I believe this is [for the most part] independent of other issues in the list, so it could be able to be addressed on its own.
I think that either a pair of revenants should cost 700-750pts, or maybe allow them to be fielded individually at 375-400pts.
I honestly don't know the proper point cost for the revenant. The reason I suggest allowing them to be taken individually above is so that, if they do turn out to be worth around 800pt for a pair, then they would be more expensive than a phantom (it does seem to me that a pair of revenants is better than one phantom). That would feel like a pretty wonky situation. Plus, if they are worth that much, allowing them to be taken individually shouldn't be unbalancing, as you would have to sink a fair amount of points into taking one of the things.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
nealhunt
|
Post subject: Reviewing the Core List Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 4:19 pm |
|
| Purestrain |
 |
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
|
Falcons are a weird problem in my mind.
Compared to a 250 point Scorpion, they seem about right at similar points. In fact, I know people who feel that the Scorpion is simply better.
OTOH, the idea that they are worth more (65 points) in a Host where their primary role is highly diluted seems extremely odd to me. Even counting for the extra durability such an arrangement adds, I cannot for the life of me figure out why there is a 30% point disparity.
_________________
Neal
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
thurse
|
Post subject: Reviewing the Core List Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 4:57 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 3:13 pm
Posts: 185
Location: Dundee, Scotland
|
|
1)IMHO the falcon cost is more important in a host because you can use their transport ability.
However, I agree with Neal. I've never taken falcon as transports as they are way too expensive. As the transported troops are usually used to assault, you cant use the falcon ability very often.
2) I have a problem with fire dragons. Compared to dire avengers, they are less good in firefight. Probabilities show that the only cases where fire dragons are better is against 3+ armor and 3+ RA. So the only advantage of fire dragons is the 15cm shot... Not worth it. I would consider giving them 4+ armor, what would fit with the fluff.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Fuzzymiles
|
Post subject: Reviewing the Core List Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 6:57 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 6:16 pm
Posts: 19
|
|
1) Revenants: Revenants are very, very powerful, IF LEFT ALONE, when they get shot at it is litterally a crapshoot whether or not you will be able to save the hit, and with only 6 BMs to break them they don't stand up all that well in addition to being the BTS goal in almost any Eldar Army.
Solution: A slight increase in points for a pair or a slightly larger points increase and let them be fielded individually, (Note an individual Revenant will break after 2 DC being lost or three formations shoot at it) I would say something like 700 for a pair if they are still forced into a pair as this makes them a major goal for the opponent or 400 for a single Revenant as this takes them out of the absolute as being the BTS, but introduces new vulnerabilities to the unit. Personally, I prefer the cost of 400 and individual Revenants despite the fluff.
2) Spirit Stones are free and act like a (minor) leader for ever formation on the table.
Solution: Give farseers and (possibly) exarchs and autarchs a transferable leader ability.
Fuzzymiles
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Moscovian
|
Post subject: Reviewing the Core List Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 7:41 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
|
When comparing Revenants to Phantoms, the Revenants don't have reinforced armor, the Phantoms do. ?If your revenants take 3 BMs, one is suppressed (not the case with a Phantom). ?Phantom weapons are TK, Revs are MW (makes a difference when going against RA).
I have rarely had the movement difference play a big part in a game, especially since range on a Rev is 45cm compared to 75cm on a Phantom.
AA is twice as affective on Phantoms.
Missle launchers are more effective across the board, narrowing the gap between 4 shots and 2.
CC and FF is better on Phantoms.
Powerfist option provides flexibility of the unit.
For those reasons alone I couldn't see a pair of Revenants costing more than a single Phantom. ?Somebody else (Neal maybe?) had posted that the point cost be revised to:
700 for two Revs
750 for one Phantom
800 for one Warlock
This works better IMO since it addresses the point problem (if there is one) of the Revs in a smaller change. ?It also addresses a problem that many people overlook - the Warlock is overpriced.
Fire Dragons do have a short range, but you have the option of fielding them with other aspects that have different advantages (such as better armor, ranged weapons, etc). ?Not something I'd like to see changed for the better or for the worse.
Falcons are... I can't get my head wrapped around the point disparity either. ?The only reason I can think of is to discourage people from fielding EIGHT Falcons at a time as transports (8 AT4+ pulse weapons averages 7 hits, that's a lot). ?I've set that up in a game where I had fire dragons transported by Falcons - it was my Break Their Spirit formation even with a Titan on the board! 
As for spirit stones, all I can say is... Commissars are free too. ?It's not like players haven't had to deal with this in other armies.
_________________ author of Syncing Forward and other stories...It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
semajnollissor
|
Post subject: Reviewing the Core List Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 8:24 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm
Posts: 1673
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA
|
|
I kind of agree that the Warlock Titan is overpriced. I'm not sure that the farsight ability and a shorter ranged, somewhat less reliable gun are worth 100 pts.
However, if the the barrage rules are changed so that MW barrages us the AP to-hit values against all targets, the psychic lance would become far more useful in most cases. Anyone know what the likelihood of that exp rule becoming official is?
Another one I'll throw out there has to do with the relative values or wraithguard and Wraithlords. It seems to me that wraithguard are the more valuable of the two choices. First, they excel in FF, which is far more useful since it can be used when supporting other units which are engaged. Also, because the base formation is made up of infantry that have no armor save, the wraithguard and their reinforced armour provide a good deal more resiliance to the formation. The only thing going for the Wraithlords are AV's, so they can each provide a cover modifier to two units. Plus, there's the whole "good in CC" bit, but as I said before, that isn't as good as the FF ability given by wraithguard.
I think that the upgrades should at least have equal point costs, and probably should have their costs reversed. However, I'm not as confident about this matter as I am with the Revenants.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Moscovian
|
Post subject: Reviewing the Core List Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 8:32 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
|
|
I never really thought about it but you are probably right on the Wraithguard / Wraithlord upgrades. How right you are I am not sure, but that does feel better. Equal points maybe? Although do you make it 150 or 175 now?
And I think the Revenants being allowed in singles instead of pairs might backfire. They will still be as powerful, the Eldar will have MORE activations, they can now target two formations per turn as opposed to only one, and a broken Rev rallies pretty well (at a 3+). Those things would be bouncing all over the place!
At least now the Eldar player has to sink 650 points into a single formation. If the cost isn't changed, that is still a chunk of your army that only fires 4 times (usually) in a game.
_________________ author of Syncing Forward and other stories...It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Chroma
|
Post subject: Reviewing the Core List Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2006 8:43 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
|
| Quote (Moscovian @ 15 Feb. 2006 (19:32)) | | And I think the Revenants being allowed in singles instead of pairs might backfire. ?They will still be as powerful, the Eldar will have MORE activations, they can now target two formations per turn as opposed to only one, and a broken Rev rallies pretty well (at a 3+). ?Those things would be bouncing all over the place! |
I like the "swapped" point values for the Wraith units.
As well, if Revenants were allowed to "single", I would hope that the cost of one alone would be more than half the value of two together, unlike Warhounds.
_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer
Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Fuzzymiles
|
Post subject: Reviewing the Core List Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:47 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 6:16 pm
Posts: 19
|
All I can comment on on the titans are the Revenants, and I feel that 700 is about right for a pair, but I don't think that 350 is right for a single Revenant, anyway, I seriously doubt we will ever see a single Revenant  . ?I have actually used the Jump Pack and 35 cm move to get Revenants in position for crossfire and general havoc in the enemies rear lines, but I have also had them monkey stomped by teleporting termies, so I can't see them going up much more than 50 points.
I have never, ever taken wraithlords, the fact that they CC just doesn't appeal to me in a slow formation and adding AT to an AP formation just makes that formation a bigger target, I don't know about swapping the points, but at the moment wraithlords just aren't worth it so I do believe they should be at least equal points at least to wraithguard.
Fuzzymiles
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Chroma
|
Post subject: Reviewing the Core List Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 2:09 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
|
| Quote (Fuzzymiles @ 16 Feb. 2006 (04:47)) | | I have never, ever taken wraithlords, the fact that they CC just doesn't appeal to me in a slow formation and adding AT to an AP formation just makes that formation a bigger target, I don't know about swapping the points, but at the moment wraithlords just aren't worth it so I do believe they should be at least equal points at least to wraithguard. |
The only time I use Wraithlords is when I'm starting their parent unit in a 'Gate... being able to "deliver" them with a Storm Serpent can be a very nasty surprise...
_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer
Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
semajnollissor
|
Post subject: Reviewing the Core List Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 3:23 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm
Posts: 1673
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA
|
|
I agree that the controling factor for the point cost of wraithlords is the ability to use the wraithgate. Also, adding wraithlords to a host makes it much more survivable in the end game.
While I'm pretty sure that the wraithguard are worth more, I'm terrible at figuring out absolute points. For all I know, wraithguard could be fair at 200pts, while wraithlords stay at 175pts. Or wraithguard could be fair at 150pts and wraithlords are also fair at 150pts. I can't tell.
On another topic, I was wondering how everyone felt about War Walkers. I've never fielded them, because they don't seem worth it. Do they live up to their point costs in actual use? It seems to me that it would be cheaper to take 6 rangers, which aren't effected by AT fire, and the AP5+ sniper ability is better than 2 AT5+ shots, even if one is a lance shot. Really, its not even a matter of them being capable units, its more that they aren't as useful as rangers. ?They're probably OK, i just wanted to see what everyone else thought.
Finally, what is the situation with the avatar and token assaults. Are the experimental assault rules finallized and generally accepted? Do they take care of the problem with the token assault of the avatar?
I'm trying to think of any other formations that might be problematic. Windriders, maybe? They are great in assaults, but they have no staying power. Do the aircraft need toning down? I know eldar airpower is the best by the fluff, but they still need to be balanced in the game. If they are too good, I would suggest knocking the pulse lasers on the Vampire and phoenix down to 30cm. I'll keep thinking on it.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Moscovian
|
Post subject: Reviewing the Core List Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:05 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:32 pm
Posts: 6414
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania USA
|
I rather like the War Walkers. ?I may be partial to them because of the way they look, but with that aside I think they do a good job. ?I have a fantastic picture from one of our games where I forced back a Titan using the War Walker scout function. That maneuver took the game! 
The price on them isn't too bad either.
_________________ author of Syncing Forward and other stories...It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
nealhunt
|
Post subject: Reviewing the Core List Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:12 pm |
|
| Purestrain |
|
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
|
However, if the the barrage rules are changed so that MW barrages us the AP to-hit values against all targets, the psychic lance would become far more useful in most cases. Anyone know what the likelihood of that exp rule becoming official is? |
I'd say very likely.
Finally, what is the situation with the avatar and token assaults. Are the experimental assault rules finallized and generally accepted? Do they take care of the problem with the token assault of the avatar? |
Again, very likely to be in just about its current form.
I don't really consider the Avatar to be a "token" assault in the common use of the term. It's a DC3 assault specialist. That's a big, hairy unit that should be able to wade into an assault all by itself and draw a LOT of enemy attention. I have no problem with supporting formations getting their fire with a solo Avatar assault.
In the rare case that the Avatar truly bit off more than it could chew, then yes, the new rules would mean that if the Avatar died before support fire that the supporting formations would not get to fire.
