Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Simple vote - one list or two
Current list plus tweaks (see below for explanation) 63%  63%  [ 27 ]
Combined air/ground list (see below for explanation) 26%  26%  [ 11 ]
Two different air/ground lists (see below for explanation) 12%  12%  [ 5 ]
Total votes : 43

Simple vote - one list or two

 Post subject: Simple vote - one list or two
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:18 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 1077
Location: surrey uk
I think the idea is that the Codex Astartes should provide for the entire spectrum. Pure mud at one end, pure airdop at the other, and everything in between.

I think that's the idea....

_________________
[url=http://tinyurl.com/bott2015][img]http://i62.tinypic.com/205fcow.jpg[/img][/url]


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Simple vote - one list or two
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 4:38 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
There is lots of discussion over on the other thread as well :)

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Simple vote - one list or two
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 5:02 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 1077
Location: surrey uk
Ta Chris. I lots of details over there and I don't want to go into all that right now.

All I will say is that the solutions being worked on seems to be based on making mud more attractive by making it cheaper, and air less attractive by making it more expensive.

Fair enough

An alternative approach might be to ignore airdrop stuff  and imagine actual armies composed of only ground stuff (maybe allow one thunderhawk). Compare these to any other race but not to (airdrop SM armies). What is missing? what do you need to make these mud armies attractive (anything other than TH, LC and Pods!)

_________________
[url=http://tinyurl.com/bott2015][img]http://i62.tinypic.com/205fcow.jpg[/img][/url]


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Simple vote - one list or two
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 5:06 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
What is missing is one extra formation, in order to make up for being lame. :)

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Simple vote - one list or two
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 5:21 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:31 pm
Posts: 1077
Location: surrey uk
so the question is under the current codex army list, are mud marines bad compared to air?

or to put it another way

given the choice, would you rather take a air, or mud marine force into battle?

if most people said air, then the holy codex isn't doing it's job properly.

_________________
[url=http://tinyurl.com/bott2015][img]http://i62.tinypic.com/205fcow.jpg[/img][/url]


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Simple vote - one list or two
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 7:23 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 9:15 pm
Posts: 7948
Location: Denmark

(Evil and Chaos @ Apr. 25 2007,16:31)
QUOTE

(Warmaster Nice @ Apr. 25 2007,15:07)
QUOTE
I'd go for option 1 to begin with. Like Neal said there's no reason why we can't make Ground or air based lists afterwards, but I'd really prefer that the core rulebook list is changed as little as possible.

So you want the 'codex list' to remain an airdrop list with only incidental ground ability?

No. I'd like a Marine list that is fluffy and competitive. As it is a pure ground force is pants. However I think air power and mobility is a very important part of the marine list from a fluff POV, so I have no problem with it being an important part of your standard tournament list.
You could also easily make rather uncompetative armies for other races if you wanted to but that doesn't justify a complete rewrite of those army lists.

Let me stress that I have no problems with variant lists that have more focus on ground forces: It is certainly fluffy for some chapters - not to mention the pre-heresy legions. However I'd rather see that lists remain focussed and speicalised in one particular type of combat. It just makes them more interesting IMO. A main list that does everything equally well is just a bit bland IMO

My main reason for not wanting any major overhauls is more practically minded though:
Many people have already assembled and painted their armies; some have enven had to re-work their formations from previous editions of Epic. It'd be really annoying for many of those to have to rebase or repaint sections of their armies because we decide to restructure the Marine army.

If at all possible I'd prefer that changes are kept to points value adjustments or minor stat tweaks (speed, armour, weapons).

A ground based Marine army from the current list could be much more competitive with just these minor tweaks. The big problems IMO beging:
Land raider cost
Vindicator speed/weapons
Dreadnoughts.

If these things are fixed the basic marine list doesn't really need adding new units or alterations to formation sizes to be an interesting varied and competative force IMO.
If you want to add new exotic units and stuff then I'm all for doing this in specialized lists where such things will fill a specific, required role in the army.

Adding a bunch of new stuff will not only require a lot of playtesting. It will also require some kind of stamp of approval from SG in order to make many players use them. I think a lot of people will question the sanity of buying a printed rulebook if significant parts of it has been changed considerably. I may be exaggerating a bit here, but I'd rather not end up with some kind of division where some people play "the printed" marine list while others play the "stacks of erratta and fan tweaks" list. In short I think the majority of players wil find it easier to cope with minor adjustments rather than a complete rewrite of their list.

Why reinvent the wheel when you can just change the tyres :;):

Just my 2 cents anyway :)

_________________
Sofa General

Nobody expects the Inquisition!!!
http://theepiclounge.wordpress.com/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Simple vote - one list or two
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 7:34 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London

(Warmaster Nice @ Apr. 26 2007,00:23)
QUOTE
No. I'd like a Marine list that is fluffy and competitive. As it is a pure ground force is pants. However I think air power and mobility is a very important part of the marine list from a fluff POV, so I have no problem with it being an important part of your standard tournament list.

Reply in other thread.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Simple vote - one list or two
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 8:12 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
However I think air power and mobility is a very important part of the marine list


Sure, it's an important part of the list we've come to know and love.

But the list itself actually claims the opposite, that a non-airpower armylist is just as viable as an airborne list!

The intent of the designer is obvious (An all-round list which can be used in either mode), but the execution is flawed (Only the airborne component is competitive).

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Simple vote - one list or two
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 8:33 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 9:08 pm
Posts: 356
Location: Beavercreek, Ohio, USA
I posted a similar version of this earlier in a different thread.  Here is an edited and expanded version of what I think needs to be done to make the Codex Astartes Army List correct, more viable, and more interesting.

I don't support a "mud-marine" and an "air assault" marine list split.  It severely goes against background and doesn't make sense.  There aren?t two different versions of the Codex Astartes, and we should not have two different versions of a Codex army.  If you want to explore different styles and flavors of Space Marines then generate and use an army list based off of one of the other Space Marine chapters.  Otherwise keep the Codex Astartes list as flexible as possible while sticking with what we know about the codex.

I suggest the following list of changes.  I think they should make it equally tempting to field any kind of marine force you would want.  If not, there is one other additional idea we may want to consider: treat Landing Craft, Thunderhawks, Strike Cruisers, and Battlebarges like they are titans and Imperial Navy aircraft, limiting them to 1/3 of the total points.  While it should be possible to assemble an entire drop/air assault Space Marine army they would not have a lot of AMTL or Imperial Navy help, which makes sense.

For the Codex Astartes list:

Change the costs for certain units:
Vindicator detachment from 300 to 275 points
Predator detachment from 300 to 275 points
Land Raider detachment from 400 to 375 points
Terminator detachment from 325 to 350 points
Landing Craft from 350 to 375 points

Remove the +10 point cost to upgrade Land Speeders to Land Speeder Tornados.  These two units are effectively the same firepower configured in different manners.

Upgrade the FF ratings on the Land Raider (to FF = 4+) and the Predator Destructor (to FF = 4+) as discussed previously.

Allow the Hunter wider availability to the other AV detachments (Vindicator, Predator, and Land Raider) as discussed previously.

Make the changes to the ATSKNF rule as discussed:
- Number of Blast Markers is halved when counting modifiers for assault resolution (round down)
- Space Marine with ?Leader? special ability remove 2 Blast Markers instead of 1.

Change the Attack bike from an LV to INF and up the speed from 30 to 35cm.

Upgrade the Land Raider to have the ability to carry 1x dreadnought in addition to the current 1 Terminator or 2 regular infantry.  (So Land Raiders would be able to carry either 1x dreadnought, or 1x Terminator, or 2x infantry.)  Change the Dreadnought upgrade to include and allow Land Raiders.  Allow Land Raiders to be added to tactical formations, not just so that they can carry dreadnoughts for that formation but so that you can carry Tacticals also.  (Imagine a Landing Craft with 2x Land Raiders, 3x Rhinos, 2x Dreadnoughts and 6x Tacticals in one formation to take an objective.)

Create Dreadnought formations of 4x Dreadnoughts for 200 points and allow the Commander (Venerable Dreadnoughts), Hunter, Land Raider, and Vindicator upgrade.

Remove Scouts from the list of different infantry units the Drop Pods can carry.  While they should be able to use Drop Pods, that would only be for strategic reasons and never for combat drops.

Add Assault Marines to the list of different infantry units the Drop Pods can carry.

Add ?plus transports? to the units listing for Assault Marines.  Adjust formation points cost if needed.

Expand the Commander Upgrade to include Techmarines and Apothecaries.  Each would be 25 points and give Invulnerable Save to appropriate units (INF and LV for Apothecaries and LV and AV for Techmarines) in the formation.

Create stats and formations for Veteran Assaults, Veteran Tacticals, and Veteran Devastators.  Allow 0-3 total number of veteran detachments, where with all chapters 0-3 of them may be Veteran Tacticals and only 0-1 of them may be Devastators or Assaults, all of which can take Land Raiders.  Other chapters would be able to take 0-2 of a certain type and none of one of the others.  Blood Angels would be allowed 0-2 Veteran Assaults and no Veteran Devastators.  Dark Angels would be allowed 0-3 Veteran Tacticals (Deathwing) and no other veterans.  Space Wolves (and probably the Salamanders) would be allowed 0-2 Veteran Devastators (Space Wolf Long Fangs) and no Veteran Assaults.  (TheSpace Wolf Veteran Tacticals would represent the Wolf Guard.)

Create stats and upgrade line items for Land Raider Prometheus and Rhino Damocles.  My suggestion would be to make the 0-1 availability Prometheus allow commanders to call combined assaults without the ?within 5cm? restriction.  I suggest that the 0-1 availability Damocles allow Terminators teleporting within LOS of the Damocles to re-roll their teleport rolls and allow the Space Marine player the ability to call in an Imperial cruiser or battleship orbital bombardment, assuming that they have paid for it?s stats and formations.

Create stats and formation info for the 0-1 formation availability Land Raider Helios and 0-1 formation availability Land Raider Crusader.  While these are mostly associated with other chapters they seem to have spread across the different chapters to a limited degree.

Breakdown of variant army lists:
Codex Astartes (Rulebook) ? Ultramarines and follow-on chapters
Ground force, Siege - Imperial Fists (no Planetfall or landers, Imperial Fist INF always in cover?)
CC Horde - Black Templars (no Imp. Navy or AMTL support, unlimited Crusaders & T-Hawk Annihilators)
Light and Fast Assault - White Scars (as per army list)
CC specialists - Blood Angels (Pred. Baal for Pred. Annihilators, Death Company, otherwise codex)
FF specialists ? Salamanders (Multi-meltas for missile launchers, limited fast assault)
Drop/scout/air - Raven Guard (limited AV, ?teleporting? Scouts, drop pods and landers required)
Smaller, more Elite - Dark Angels (Codex except for Deathwing, Ravenwing, Veteran Tacticals only)
general Horde- Space Wolves (large assault and tactical formations, limited Dev., L-Russ Exterminators)
Constrained Organization ? Iron Hands (no Terminator det., access to leaders and mult. Supreme commanders)

_________________
I shot a Deathstrike Missile and destroyed an enemy titan in my pajamas last night. ?How it got into my pajamas I still don't know...


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Simple vote - one list or two
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:05 pm 
Purestrain
Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
My main reason for not wanting any major overhauls is more practically minded though:
Many people have already assembled and painted their armies; some have enven had to re-work their formations from previous editions of Epic. It'd be really annoying for many of those to have to rebase or repaint sections of their armies because we decide to restructure the Marine army.

If at all possible I'd prefer that changes are kept to points value adjustments or minor stat tweaks (speed, armour, weapons).


A good summary of my position as well.

Ditto for the Eldar.

_________________
Neal


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Simple vote - one list or two
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:11 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
Yes any changes should not lead to repainting!

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Simple vote - one list or two
PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 10:14 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
I agree no changes should lead to changes in the size of formations etc.

Which is why my proposals were just about adding an extra formation to an all-mud army, rather than wider changes.

To summarise:

- minus 25 points from practically all ground formations except scouts.
- thunderhawks (And probably landing craft) up by 25 points
- charge 25 points for teleporting or drop podding


That would leave air-assult armies practically unchanged (As Hena's list demonstrated), while making mud marine lists slightly cheaper (They'd get about 200-250 points extra to spend on one extra ground-pounding formation... WHICH THEY NEED).

Cheers.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Simple vote - one list or two
PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 12:32 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8711
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe
Hmmm are mud-mariens really that bad?
My regular opponend never uses droppods, transport-flyers or flyers.

I lost 5 out of 6 games against him with my orks (the only win was a 100pts tie-break)
I lost 1 of 2 battles with my BlackLegion.
I only won 1 out of 1 battle with my Biel-Tan Eldar
I lost all 4 battle with my own SpaceMarines (and the one with the Salamanders armylist too).


So: Am I really such a bad strategist or are mud-marines competitive?:D





_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net