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

Let's Discuss Whitescars-Trial 2016! [hilarity ensues]
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=73&t=30981		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  jimmyzimms [ Mon Feb 29, 2016 2:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Let's Discuss Whitescars-Trial 2016! [hilarity ensues]
:spin :spin :spin :spin
following on from this

Now that we've dealt with the most egregious problem in the original Whitescars list, the lack of any AA system let's figure out some trial inclusions for this year.

-Remove Vindicator upgrade on Whirlwinds. Add them on Assault, Tactical and Terminator formations where, as Dave puts it, "they might get taken".
-Allow WS attack bikes the option for MM upgrade/choice
-Allow bike and Predator formations access to what's basically the Eldar Hit & Run Tactics. This would NOT be on other formations. I suspect there's a small price bump needed.
-Whitescar Vindicator. Remove Walker and +5cm movement. (basically remove the Dozer-blade)

Let's discuss
Author:  Sayrewolf [ Mon Feb 29, 2016 3:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Let's Discuss Whitescars-Trial 2016! [hilarity ensues]
Hit and run predators! Now that's something I would like to see. What we thinking though, price bump or lose the sponsons?
Author:  Dave [ Mon Feb 29, 2016 3:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Let's Discuss Whitescars-Trial 2016! [hilarity ensues]
I'm in favor of the two Vindicator changes, they make an under-used option slightly more attractive.

8 MW5+ shots on a unit that can move 35cm would need some playtesting. I'd be willing to test though, the Attack Bikes in the WS list are more expensive ONLY because the WS bikes have walker.

I don't think there's a need to bring a special rule into the mix here this late in the game. SM bikes and Predators would just fine as they are.
Author:  jimmyzimms [ Mon Feb 29, 2016 3:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Let's Discuss Whitescars-Trial 2016! [hilarity ensues]
I'd suspect it would be limited MM's and eat up an upgrade which means no commander which in WS bike formations is realllllly desired for the chappy and/or commander joint assault.

IF, and that's a huge deal, they join the H&R forces, I'd go for the price bump approach first, just so that we don't have to create Whitescars Predator X entries. Bikes likely would need a size adjustment down as well.
Author:  Dave [ Mon Feb 29, 2016 3:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Let's Discuss Whitescars-Trial 2016! [hilarity ensues]
jimmyzimms wrote:
I'd suspect it would be limited MM's and eat up an upgrade which means no commander which in WS bike formations is realllllly desired for the chappy and/or commander joint assault.


Don't follow you there. Each upgrade can be taken once in a SM list.
Author:  jimmyzimms [ Mon Feb 29, 2016 3:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Let's Discuss Whitescars-Trial 2016! [hilarity ensues]
Well not universally but yeah ... ahhh i had misread the WS upgrade box text (I blame children ;D )
Author:  kyussinchains [ Mon Feb 29, 2016 9:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Let's Discuss Whitescars-Trial 2016! [hilarity ensues]
would rather see hit and run in a variant/fan/friendly list rather than the main list....

if the fluffonauts really can't contain their RAGE, what about giving WS bike formations first strike instead? represents the lightning attack really well IMO
Author:  Apocolocyntosis [ Mon Feb 29, 2016 9:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Let's Discuss Whitescars-Trial 2016! [hilarity ensues]
I think a more flavourful WS list would be good, but the more out-there (that is, interesting) ideas would be best in a variant list, or in a WS 'redux' list as is happening with LATD – so very minimal changes to core list for now (all for AA and vindis would be fine).
Author:  GlynG [ Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Let's Discuss Whitescars-Trial 2016! [hilarity ensues]
I still think dropping the core WS Biker formation to 4 strong rather than 8 strong merits testing and would be the best solution. It gives the hit and run, fluid battlelines breaking and reforming, feel that the WS background describes but the current WS fails badly at, all without needing to create a new special rule.
Author:  Sayrewolf [ Mon Mar 07, 2016 2:05 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Let's Discuss Whitescars-Trial 2016! [hilarity ensues]
You aren't wrong about the formation sizes As far as I can tell. 8 stands strong is a little too much on the hammer meets anvil end of the Marine equation than hit and run skirmishing.












(Eldar hit and run tactics all the way though)
Author:  kyussinchains [ Tue Mar 15, 2016 6:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Let's Discuss Whitescars-Trial 2016! [hilarity ensues]
if you want a horde of smaller bike formations, there is literally nothing stopping you taking nothing but an army of 5-strong bike formations in the codex list, yes it's a pisser when only one formation can fit in a thunderhawk, but that doesn't fit the 'angry horde of raging mongols' vibe the whitescars are going for anyway

4-strong bike formations are fodder, there will be no 'break and withdraw' with the way hackdowns work, if you're lucky you'll end up with a bunch of 1-stand formations left on t3/4 contesting objectives which is boring and dull and generally annoying
Author:  Kyrt [ Tue Mar 15, 2016 8:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Let's Discuss Whitescars-Trial 2016! [hilarity ensues]
I must admit I do find it a little frustrating when a variant list offers LESS flexibility for the core unit type of the list.

This is a bit of a bugbear for me with the alaitoc list: 8 units is about the only combination (of 4-8) you would never choose in the biel tan list. At least for alaitoc they have the advantage of being core - for white scars there is no such distinction.

It seems there is a difference of opinion on how the bike-centric flavour of white scars should be represented - either in large or small formations - but surely it is not beyond the realms of possibility they would do both? Why not have an 8 and a 5? Or 8 and 4 (which I personally would probably stick in a thawk - plenty of people do this with assaults and devs which are neither breaking the game nor too small to be useful).
Author:  kyussinchains [ Tue Mar 15, 2016 9:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Let's Discuss Whitescars-Trial 2016! [hilarity ensues]
personally I say leave the list be, it's approved, stable and reasonably good, there are certainly some guys who play it well on the EUK scene

the idea of tiny swarms of bikers hitting and running is a nice one, but doesn't translate simply into EA, then you get into the territory of special rules and that's an avenue that we don't need to go down IMO

I'd much rather see a fan/alt list for the more thematic formations and funky rules, who knows, everyone may love it and adopt it as the 'official' whitescars list in time

TL;DR: If it ain't broke, don't fix it
Author:  ffoley [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 1:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Let's Discuss Whitescars-Trial 2016! [hilarity ensues]
I agree with Kyrt. This list is v similar to codex - a few good options deleted and you get instead an unattractive big bike formation. If I wanted a lot of bikes I'd be far happier playing them in 5s for 200pts using codex with all the other benefits (devs, teleporting termies) Changing the WS list to, say, 4 bikes for 175 with another 1-4 for 50 pts each would make this the list of choice for bikers.
Author:  GlynG [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 2:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Let's Discuss Whitescars-Trial 2016! [hilarity ensues]
I'd be happy to see a small biker formation with optional upgrade to make it larger, allows flexibility.
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/