Well in my list all Dark Angels Characters are under one header: Dark Angels Masters.
This could be a
- Company Master (= Captain)
- Interrogator Chaplain (= Chaplain)
- Librarian (= Librarian)

Inessence their have the same stats as the Codex units PLUS Fearless. And the Librarians FF-EA is named Hellfire instead of Smite, because Hellfire is a default psychic power for Dark Angels Librarians.

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

You can't keep pushing the costs up on all the DA units as 'codex' marines can't operate at to low an activation counts. Plus replacing invulnerable save with fearless well shows the intractable nature - you stay fighting for longer, but this is hazardous for your health!

_________________
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

Oh didn't see that you replaced the Invulnerable Save with Fearless. Interesting and your rationalisation makes sence.
But then shouldn't hjave the Deathwing Terminators not have a similar penalty for their fearlessness? Perhabs loosing Thick Rear Armour?

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

Deathwing should be better than normal terminators, probably cost more to (but then normal termies are under-priced anyway) so I have no problems with them gaining the fearless ability.
I like the idea of replacing the invulnerable save with the fearless rule, fits the Dark Angels character well.

As for names of Librarians:
All characters in the dark angels chapter are a part of the inner circle, technically therefore they are Deathwing, though this is hard to grasp as Ravenwing characters and Company masters are also inner circle.
All the inner circle characters are Masters and above, so how about Master Librarian, Inner Circle Librarian, or just keep the Deathwing Librarian because it´s easier?
I´ll keep thinking . . .
Looks god though, loking forward to playing with it.

_________________
"Stars in my pocket like grains of sand."

www.spartangames.co.uk

I might make myself unpopular, saying this in this thread.
Imho there is no need to differentiate DA from Codex Marines.
Sure they organise themselves differently but I fail to see the the impact that this has in Epic scale.
It's not that Ultramarine tactical squads has 1 missile launcher per 5 man unit.
I know that ravenwing has regularly had special rules for their bike skill, but is it necessary? Same with Deathwing.

That said. I have a fluffy rules suggestion.
change the BTS victory condition so that they get BTS if they kill the opponents supreme commander (or if none present normal BTS).
They are searching for news on unforgiven. This could potentially change a deal for your opponent (win BTS even against an Ork army with a Great Gragant).

/Staffan

_________________
/Shoel
My Painting Corner

Its a nice scenario idea but flawed in the gt scenario (the great gargant is of course the bts anyway!) as the simplest way to get it would be load up a thunderhawk packed with sniper scouts and go shoot him, making it a bit easier than normal (for AV supreme commanders its still Terminators all the way).

_________________
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

I dunno there are many with just as few differences compared to the DA.

BA have a focus on assault squads and they have a special formation of berzerking assault marines with delusions of grandeur.

The Dark Angels have a penchant for bikes/speeders and terminators with the differences between the Deathwing, Ravenwing and Battle Companies being quite marked.  If lists like the Whitescars and Blood Angels exist then there isn't much reason for a Dark Angels list not to either.  Besides it isn't like there is a massive need to cut back on lists being developed as we don't have to worry about a slow GW design process that wont get around to it for several years.

When you get down to it are any of the lists really needed?  Nope, not one bit.  Marines in RT only had one list.  Blood Angels, Space Wolves, Black Templar, Whitescars, Salamanders, Dark Angels, etc. were all the same and even now the basic list can handle all of them if you just gloss over the differences.  But when you get down to it this project doesn't seem to be about glossing over the differences but celebrating them.  Sure Blood Angels and Black Templar could make due without specialized squads showing their penchant for close quarters but why not accentuate it instead and show how the slight difference (in the case of Blood Angels at least) effects the larger force.

So in the same light, sure DA players can get by with standard units but why not show how these organizational differences effect them at a large scale.  In my mind the larger size of the force only goes to make the apparent organizational differences all the greater compared to their 40k incarnation.  We get to see organizational oddities at the company level now rather than simply viewing them individual units involved in a limited skirmish.

So as some one who is starting to love the sheer diversity of NetEA I say that people should let the creativity fly.  The Dark Angels are perfectly acceptable for a niche list because there is so much to work with on this macro scale.  One surprising thing I've found is that none of the lists have gone into focusing on the DA as a fleet based chapter, the ability to upgrade the Battle Barge to say, the Rock would certainly be a very cool addition.  

So far I've liked the various takes on the special units that 40k focuses on (Ravenwing and Deathwing) but also taking a look at how the army is organized reveal that the Dark Angels are far from average as far as these things go.  

Incidentally while I dislike 'Intractable' in 40k I find that on the Epic scale it makes more sense.  On the small scale DA are willing to give up ground if it befits them but zooming out to a larger level they will be loathe to give up important battlefield objectives.  In the Battle of Koth Ridge for example they were highly mobile and flitted across the ridge protecting key points as they went instead of staying still and stubbornly holding small sections but they were utterly tenacious in their defense of the whole ridge.  So there is another difference to play on, their sheer tenacity born from protecting their once-stained honour.

So we've got a chapter that uses specialist Speeder and Bike formations (I like how BlackLegion captures this with the Attack and Support variants), they have some of the most steadfast terminators this side of the Grey Knights, they specialize in fleet-based actions more than the average marine chapter (with a focus on terminator-based teleport assaults) and they have a chapter-wide culture of steadfastness and bravery that manifests itself on a macro-scale nicely.  So again, you can say "well they've only really got terminators and bikes" but you may as well say "well Blood Angels only have Assault Squads" or "Salamanders only have a fire fetish".  Technically true but it sells short the differences that do exist.  So personally (and I will admit a bias) I don't see much of a reason not to make a DA list especially when all factions seem to be getting sub-list love (unlike 40k).

As to the second bit I tend to like keeping things like that to particular scenarios myself.  The DA do more than hunt the Fallen (as the Fallen are extremely rare) and even then their hunt can take the form of searching for evidence rather than simply dragging off some unwitting chump.  I like keeping that facet of the chapter strictly as narrative fodder since it wont always be present in every battle they fight (and The_Real_Chris makes a good point about the imbalance it could cause in addition).

Just my two cents as a Dark Angel fanatic.  So I say keep up the good work because I'll be trying the BlackLegion version out tomorrow and I'm already liking it more than any of the DA codices made for 40k since the 3rd Edition abomination, I'll post feedback after giving it a go.  

Hate doing two posts in a row, even if a day apart, but I think it's time to drop some feedback for my favourite chapter.

Last night I gave BlackLegion's list a go in a small game against the AMTL and thought it was pretty good outside of a few observations:

- Increasing character price wasn't worth it unfortunately, that extra five points a pop ended up adding 20 extra points to my list which meant my opponent got enough extra to get an upgrade for one of his titans.  My initial thought is to leave fearless off of command units and let the attached unit decide whether it is fearless or nor
- The lack of multi-melta Landspeeders could really hurt against WE heavy lists.  Landspeeders provide invaluable support fire against things like Titans and the numbers they can be taken in in a standard marine list make them useful.  Though we can start to achieve similar results with the Ravenwing unit it can only get to Attack Bikes max which is a bit of a problem.
- The Deathwing are fairly expensive (but incredibly useful for the price I will admit readily) but they are starting to reach prohibitive levels in the list as Fearless is incredibly helpful if you screw up but when using Terminators correctly they will tend to win handily and overpower their opponents, as such I have a couple of recommendations later on in the post.


Now the current list being made by The_Real_Chris fixes a few of these but a few things stand out to me on a basic read-through (no playtest data yet, probably next game):

- Again the Deathwing have crept into expensive territory and I think a solution for this needs to be found that is both fluffy and effective (and yes I have a suggestion).
- The Ravenwing Squad seems quite muddled to me and tries to do too much at once.  I suggest we need to split the entry like BlackLegion did but give each one a useful niche in the army befitting of the Ravenwing.
- Though character price decreased I'm still not really sold on the idea of Fearless characters in the list.  I'm still of the mind we keep character stats the same as codex.

As for things I liked:

- The changed Tactical Squad loadout is cool and it starts to give the DA a very close quarters support feel to them.  Though I was never a fan of the DA plasma fetish I'll admit that it helps in Epic scale to have a signature weapon to help differentiate you.  Though I don't think we should go too far with it either.  I'd probably leave the plasma tank myself though a Plasma Dreadnought would be fairly cool.
- I liked the Ironwing option, it was fluffy (in the old school way that I like) but nicely limited us from being too tank focused as the DA are primarily a rapid strike army that uses infantry as the main attack force.


Now my suggestions for some of the problems I've been having in both lists:

- We've got expensive terminators, that much we know.  So how about this solution?  Deathwing Terminators are supposed to be highly versatile formations always given the best equipment for the job at hand.  So how about we give them these options.  The basic loadout will be a Heavy Flamethrower (what I consider to this day to be the signature Deathwing weapon).  So this squad now has a much more limited range than the standard Terminator Detachment and is more tightly focused on assaults.  With this in mind let's scale their cost back to 375 (might be too low but losing out on assault cannons could be a real drag for those who used terminators as a tough firebase after clearing an objective, they'd have to keep them moving as they couldn't defend themselves after an assault) and give them an extra attack in FF that ignores cover (or the usual 15mm AP4+ ignore cover shot outside).  So we have a basic loadout for Terminator.  Now give the option of upgrading a stand of Terminators to Cyclone-toting terminators (2x ML essentialy) for 5-10 points a pop.  Less effective at anti-tank then their codex brothers but with an increased range.  Now players have a cheaper base unit and the ability to add some firepower to help it branch out without it being simply "better" than the codex entry.

- I think the Ravenwing unit should be broken into two units because that's been how they've usually operated.  You have a Ravenwing bike detachment and the Ravenwing Landspeeder detachment and never the twain shall meet.  Keep the RW attack bike's MM but and allow the entire squad to be replaced with MM bikes (thus replacing the standard Speeder in the SM list).  The RW speeder detachment should not have a basic version, only a Tornado and a Typhoon (no need for a MM version as the attack bikes handle that).  Keep scout and the 3+ save because that rocks nicely enough.  Now each squad has a niche (speeders get fast ranged support and bikes get fast close support and assault).

- Just take fearless off the characters after that and I think the above would adequately model our forces.  It would just be a matter of getting balanced point costs.  Maybe I'll update and post my list as a possible example of what I'm thinking.  

(Wow that post took a little longer than I thought it would.)

Interesting LS idea.

As for termies I've been using in the salamanders list 2 hve flamers for the termies for some time and they wiegh in fairly 325 (25 less than regular terminators). But they don't have much in the way of ranged attacks and are stuffed vs skimmers. Having just 1 heavy flamer means while they can FF a better they will have no shotting to speak of. Maybe just try 375 for 1 assault cannon? Or just make them better and give them one heavy flamer and one assault cannon for 400? Or instead (another option) 1 cyclone launcher?

Personally I quite like the fearless characters (personally my characters would all love to be fearless instead of inv save!). And the game effect is somewhat akin to the guard (sadly or positively depending on how you feel).

_________________
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

Fluff wise Fearlessness is a cornerstone of the whole Deathwing background and I would not be too pleased to have it replaced with anything other than Fearless, especially on Special Characters who are all Deathwing members. I do however like the Ravenwing Ideas.

_________________
My head is full of War...

[img]http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk120/Warhead40k/Tyranid%20Swarm/DSC02262.jpg[/img]

Hmm the 2 Flamer idea sounds good and I don't mind terribly about the weakness in shooting (that's part of the fun about the unit in my mind) because to me the Deathwing have always been about desperate close assaults against overwhelming odds.

The mixed weapon idea sounds cool but I don't think I'm big on the idea of mixing weapons within a single stand.  Though I think there is definite merrit in the idea of only one Assault Cannon.  I'll try testing the mixed detachment idea and the single AssCan idea next game to see which is better.

The way I've currently got it as of revising my list is that the basic 4 unit detachment is 375 points and comes with 2 heavy flamers in each stand.  For 5 points a stand you can replace one stand with a "support" squad that carries a CML that gets 2x AP5+/AT6+ shots.  So the basic squad is a cheap and incredibly effective close assault unit that needs support to keep it safe from things like skimmers, if you want them to be shooty then you can replace one or more with a "support" squad stand.  If you want them all to be shooty then the whole unit is 395 points and a little less effective at shooting than a codex marine squad but still hell on wheels because of fearless.  The greatest strength will be mixing them to get enough support units to protect the squad from ranged threats while keeping the cost low enough so that the unit doesn't become bloated.

So if a Deathwing player wants a cheap-ish beat stick unit then they can get that and if they want a good generalist unit they can do that as well.

I've been looking at fearless characters a little more and I think I'm starting to get swayed in that direction.  So we'll see how that pans out, the more I look at it the more uses I can see for it.  Not like I ever make Inv. Saves anyways right?

In any case I'm attaching the list I came up with.  There is a potential change section at the end for things I'm thinking of removing/adding in the future.  It is a bit of an amalgam of your ideas, those of BlackLegion and some of my own from the first DA list I ever made when I started playing.  So what do you think?

Document type changed to .doc and now it is small enough to attach!

Hmm interesting.
Again: Which version of my list did you use? The latest version is V2.3 here
http://www.epic40k.co.uk/images/epicdarkangelsv2-3.pdf

For the Ravenwing i tried to mimic the Ravenwing Squadron's organisation of the current Codex.
So the Ravenwing Attack Detachment essentially is two to three Ravenwing Attack Squadrons at full strength (6 Bikes per Squadron = two CombatSquats of 3 Bikes each = two units in Epic with 3 Bikes per base) totals in 6 units in Epic.

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

I used version v2.3 in my game and while the Ravenwing Attack squad is a nice idea I wasn't its biggest fan in the newest codex.  I'm a bit of a Dark Angels grognard so I always tend toward the 2nd Edition way if I can (I'm a little weird like that).

My main thing was that the RAS severely limited the amount of close ranged MW we could put out.  The hard limit to only two attack bikes was a little strict in my mind and the current codex getting rid of our attack bike squads always seemed a bit strange to me.

So not knocking your decision to go with the method in the new codex but I wasn't a huge fan of it when it came out that way in the 40k version so I decided to go for something a little more standard for them in my version, preferring smaller detachments that could be customized more.

But moving on I was a busy bee at work and decided to make a variant of the list I made today with a few of the changes I was thinking of.  So this one is just like the list in the post above but with two big changes:

- Only one kind of Deathwing squad (has a single Assault Cannon)
- I changed the Ravenwing fairly drastically.  First I gave them Bolters and a Plasma Gun and then I swapped their firefight and close combat values around to turn them into a shootier bike squad as opposed to the assault bikers you see in the WS and Codex lists.

This is just a possible variant and not a new version.  I'm just wondering which people seem to prefer more.  They each do some things I like and some things I dislike but I'm wondering which line would be better to follow.  So take a look at both and see which one fits better.

Finally a crazy idea hit me while I was cleaning up at work (maybe a little too crazy but I'll see what others think).  When making the RW I was having troubles getting them close to the unit as it existed in 2nd Edition because they had several things that made them a fairly unique unit.  The first was 'Skilled Rider' that allowed them to perform better skid turns this could have either been represented with Scouts or Walker.  In the end I agreed with The_Real_Chris and BlackLegion on this, let WS have Walker and RW can get Scouts.  Next they had 'jink' which The_Real_Chris represented with a 3+ save (I liked this so it is in my version as well).  Finally they had the ability to travel fast and negate firing penalties for movement.  Now at this point I couldn't find anything to represent it so I left it out.

But tonight I was thinking of something.  What if we didn't allow Ravenwing units to negate the penalty to shoot for doubling.  Now of course they would need to be limited otherwise so here are a few down sides:

- On a hold or regroup order Ravenwing units can only choose to Move
- Ravenwing units cannot use the Sustained Fire order
- (optional) -1 to initiative (represents the difficulty to control the bike and fire with good accuracy I suppose)

So again I said it was kind of a crazy idea and absolutely unnecessary but for some reason it just popped into my mind as an alternate way of doing the Ravenwing.  But as it stands I think most of the current ways of doing the Ravenwing are sufficient at the scale Epic represents.  But I suppose if we wanted to go crazy with it then that would be one way to go.

But I've rambled enough for now I suppose.

Plasma Cannon?

I know you don't like the stats of the Plasma Cannon (The Demolisher one, not the Titan one), but a Heavy Plasma Gun doesn't exist in W40K.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

Hmm, I missed the version on the Leman Russ Demolisher.  Is it just me or are too many things taking the name plasma cannon?  Me I think we need to differentiate between an infantry version (Heavy Plasma Gun), a vehicle mounted one (Plasma Cannon) and the titan version (Heavy Plasma Cannon).  I know that NetEA is trying to stay on par with WH40k but this just seems like a problem of semantics brought about when GW simplified plasma weaponry in 3rd edition.  My stance is that the infantry version simply gets called the heavy plasma gun because the stats on the tank seem a little over the top for what is supposed to be an infantry weapon.  So to represent this pretend that the current 40k infantry portable plasma weapon simply fires on low power, the power requirement needed to fire the full power blast are only possible with a vehicle and the titan version needs a different name than the vehicle mounted one (because having distinct stats for each weapon seems important round these parts).

In any case the current "plasma cannon" in 40k doesn't have any form of recharge or slowfire either.  At some point I think people need to take a step back and sort these kinds of things out.

So I'm all for infantry/vehicle/war engine getting different names along the way.  In any case plasma weapons seem to follow a natural level progression so Heavy Plasma Gun is the perfect way to differentiate between a man portable plasma weapon and something carried around on heavy vehicles.

But what do others think?  If the DA tactical detachment sticks with a heavy plasma weapon as their heavy weapon should it be the 30cm AP5+/AT5+ or should they use the already established 30cm AP4+/AT4+ SF?  On one hand the first seems to be a little more sensible for an infantry weapon (same stats as an assault cannon toted around by terminators) and in sustained fire it is 4+/4+.  On the other hand the established "plasma cannon" is heavier than most infantry weapons we see (especially on average units) and if the tac detachment pulls sustained fire it is 3+/3+ which seems a little insane to me.  Or should the Dark Angel tac detachment just stick with the ML and leave plasma alone?

Seems to be an important question to ask in any case.  I like the feel of the DA getting a more powerful but shorter ranged gun because it feels closer to their tactical style but if people are going to get hung up on the naming of the weapon compared to 40k then maybe it is best to just avoid it if keeping on par with 40k is a really important part of the project.