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

F-ERC IG changes
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=12085		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  okpjay890 [ Fri Mar 21, 2008 3:46 pm ]
Post subject:  F-ERC IG changes
Below are the changes we have adopted in our community of ?francophones players. Note this is unofficial but many players use it and 2 tournament in France and 1 in Belgium will used it.

Imperial Guard :
GI Special rules:
1) Commissars: The random number of commissars was abolished in favour of a fixed number depending on the size of the games. This to have a fixed number of 6 commissars in a game of 3000pts. To do this, an IG army was given by Commissioner 1 slice of 500pts even incomplete. ?

Units:
1) loses Deathstrike "no line of sight" Same as TC

2) Vultures, missiles hellstrikes spend 120cm AT2 + one shot come 90cm AT3+ one shot: It turned out that the unit was clearly too strong and so easy to use kleenex at the limit it was decided to change the profile hellstrike of forcing the player to become a little more thinking about the placement and timing of the use of a training Vultures.

3) Hellhound his FF3 + becomes ignores covered: Boost seemed obvious to on the one hand, represent the fury of a launch
Heavy flame type Inferno and another to give a little interest to an improvement which is considered by the majority of expensive.

4) Bombard range from 45cm to 60cm: Again a change seemed necessary in order to restore a little color to that unit who suffer from comparison face of a formation of Manticores prefered in 95% of cases because of its immensely greater range.

5) Demolisher becomes 30cm MA4 +, +1 attack and gives MA FF for the baneblade and leman russ. This contribution to the upgrading of heavy armoured baneblade as frontline.

6) Leman russ demolisher: the shooting from 3 + to 4 +, and its cost 250pts at the 3: This amendment to the shooting intervenes
Following the new profile of the demolisher it allocates an extra attack MA. And the cost revised upwards to 50pts
Always as a result of the modification of the canon demolisher.

7) Baneblade, the howitzer 75cm AP4 + / + AC4 becomes: Super howitzer 75cm AP3 + / + AC3: This change is part of the reclamation work even rehabilitation Baneblade as heavy armoured frontline.

8) All heavy bolters heavy armour become heavy bolters matched: All heavy must have this modif
Of heavy bolters paired, in the interests of consistency fluffique. For in Warhammer 40,000, all heavy armoured vehicles are equipped of heavy bolters matched. However this does not alter the values of shooting heavy armour benefiting from this change.

9) Rough riders : loss ?the extra attack: Balancing this unit which gave 150pts for training
6 units of powerful and too cheap given the many capabilities it is generously equipped.

Aircraft:
10) The Marauder bomber from 2PB to 3 PB, shielding ability to 6 + damage 2:
It was noted that there was very little Marauder played and shielding that are not in the equation with W40k profile.
The increase in the number of points of the dam is to enable the marauder to be more attractive with the BM?provides additional training to 6PB and also continue to be relatively effective in the case of a lost Aircraft as a bomber would never benefits of a bonus for reaching and with a profile 2PB say that the Marauder becomes virtually useless in terms of bombing.

Any comments are welcomes

Jay
Author:  Dave [ Fri Mar 21, 2008 5:32 pm ]
Post subject:  F-ERC IG changes
There were some polls here with regards to a lot of these issues a year ago, here's what the TC community had to say.

1) Commissars: 1 Commissar per 500 points is what most people agreed with.  I was rather disappointed this didn't make it into the SG FAQ 2008.

1) Deathstrike:  The removal of "No LOS" and addition of "Indirect Fire" I believe was unanimous here.

2) Vultures: Same here.

3) Hellhound: Most people thought that the Hellhound didn't need the upgrade.  Personally I think all flame weapons should confer Ignore Cover to FF attacks though.

4) Bombard: Our polls didn't deem the increase necessary.  The roll of the unit being different from that of the Manticore.  Short range anti-infantry in cover, as opposed to long range artillery support.

5) Demolisher: A little different that what we use, but considering how much debate this has opened this is not surprising to me.  MW4+ is what was chosen, but many people feel it is too much.  We also left Ignore Cover on the weapon as opposed to adding an additional MW FF attack, but did reduce the FF to 4+ as you guys did.  Was your 50 point increase per each tank upgraded?  Or for all 3 tanks?

I think the best remedy for this situation is going to be moving the MW to the notes column, so we can specify seperate AP and AT values, and also denote where the MW ability applies to AP, AT, or both.

7) Baneblade: Same here, again with the Demolisher cannon change being controversial.

8) All heavy bolters heavy armour: I take this to mean you added Twin Heavy Bolters to the Baneblade and Shadowswords?  I agree with that, I know it was brought up a couple of times here but I don't know why it wasn't in  our revisions.

9) Rough riders: The same here, and well liked.

10) Marauder: 3BP bomb racks was what we went with.  A few people suggested the overhaul to bring the unit in line with the FW model.  I think the more conservative approach was taken though until the air rules come to the table.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Fri Mar 21, 2008 5:34 pm ]
Post subject:  F-ERC IG changes
8 - Under our revisions, the Baneblade recieved 3x Twin Heavy Bolters to make it WYSIWYG.

I can't tell if the French have done this or not, from your syntax.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Fri Mar 21, 2008 5:40 pm ]
Post subject:  F-ERC IG changes
Really? I don't know why that didn't happen, as it passed a vote.
Author:  Steve54 [ Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:01 am ]
Post subject:  F-ERC IG changes
This is a prime example of why I'm in favour of the minimalist changes that in the eraata

All that is needed is the deathstrikes change (though its not terrible that it hasn't happened) and upgunning the Baneblade. A lot of the other changes simply aren't needed and seem to be based on the opinions of a loud few
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Sat Mar 22, 2008 1:11 pm ]
Post subject:  F-ERC IG changes

(Steve54 @ Mar. 22 2008,09:01)
QUOTE
This is a prime example of why I'm in favour of the minimalist changes that in the eraata

All that is needed is the deathstrikes change (though its not terrible that it hasn't happened) and upgunning the Baneblade. A lot of the other changes simply aren't needed and seem to be based on the opinions of a loud few

Steve, most of these mods that the French have incorporated are highly supported and in many cases even needed to increase balance.




Commissars:

A very sensible change. The current random situation unduly distorts game balance.


Loses Deathstrike "no line of sight" Same as TC:

A very sensible change, though many say they're still too cheap.


Vultures:

Vultures are currently overpowered and the majority admit this.


Hellhound his FF3 + becomes ignores covered:

Probably an okay change, but not entirely nessesary.


Bombard range from 45cm to 60cm:

Probably an okay change, but again one that isn't strictly nessesary.


Demolisher becomes 30cm MA4 +, +1 attack and gives MA FF for the baneblade and leman russ:

Roundly rejected by this forum and now by Jervis.



7) Baneblade, the howitzer 75cm AP4 + / + AC4 becomes: Super howitzer 75cm AP3 + / + AC3

Highly supported by this forum.


8) All heavy bolters heavy armour become heavy bolters matched:

Still not sure what this means, but if it means 'change the 1x heavy bolter on the baneblade to 3x twin heavy bolters, I'm all for it.


9) Rough riders : loss  the extra attack

Roundly supported by this forum.



10) The Marauder bomber from 2PB to 3 PB, shielding ability to 6 + damage 2:

I support some kind of upgunning, the current Marauder is 100% useless as compared to organic artillery.





A good 75% of the French mods have nigh-total support on TC, at least in principle if not in execution (For example TC arrived at a different up-powering of the Marauder, starting from the same 'it's useless' standpoint).
Author:  okpjay890 [ Sat Mar 22, 2008 1:47 pm ]
Post subject:  F-ERC IG changes
Still not sure what this means, but if it means 'change the 1x heavy bolter on the baneblade to 3x twin heavy bolters, I'm all for it.
Yes that's all heavy bolters become twin linked heavy bolters on all heavy armoured (Baneblade, Shadowsword and collectors/forgeworld heavy armoured).

Demolisher becomes 30cm MA4 +, +1 attack and gives MA FF for the baneblade and leman russ:

Roundly rejected by this forum and now by Jervis.
The change in the guard list was necessary because the demolisher being modified for the Vindicator, which is now played very filling because of a lack MW in the SM list along he is a real effective support in assaults now.

Jay
Author:  Dave [ Sat Mar 22, 2008 2:22 pm ]
Post subject:  F-ERC IG changes

(Evil and Chaos @ Mar. 22 2008,07:11)
QUOTE
Loses Deathstrike "no line of sight" Same as TC:

A very sensible change, though many say they're still too cheap.

Bear in mind that we got rid of the No LOS rule AND added Indirect Fire to the Deathstrike.
Author:  Steve54 [ Sun Mar 23, 2008 7:43 am ]
Post subject:  F-ERC IG changes
The more vocal members on this forum pushing things - including yourself E&C isn't the same as widespread support.

COMMISSARS - I've yet to hear a more compelling argument for this than hat it reduces modelling. I and must people I have come across view it is a bit of fun in a GAME

DEATHSTRIKES - I'd support this but not having it doesn't overly matter

VULTURES - the new skimmer rule fixes these

HELLHOUND - not needed

BOMBARD - not needed
Both these units are used regularily as it is

DEMOLISHER - about as popular/needed as the MW barrage changes which have thankfully also been rejected

BANEBLADE - widely supported, but even with the tested changes it is hardly ever taken over the Shadowsword

BOLTERS ?

ROUGH RIDERS - I haven't met widespread support for this - they are viewed as a unit which is effective if it can do exactly as it wants but tends to be easily negated

As I've said in other forums/threads the main army lists - orks, marines, IG, eldar and black legion are all very well balanced with only minor tweaks needed. Over the drawn out process of the rules review a myriad of unnecessary changes have been added, fortunately the majority of these have been dropped.
I would have liked to see more - marine armour drop, deathstrikes + baneblade but if it is a choice between the very minimal changes in the errata and the widespread unnecessary changes pushed here I would go with what Jervis has done.
Author:  Steve54 [ Sun Mar 23, 2008 11:04 am ]
Post subject:  F-ERC IG changes
I don't see the problem with luck - its part of rolling dice

Everybody I have spoken to thinks Vultures are fine with the new skimmer rules.

From my POV the official errata changes only effect tournament games as if you are just playing in-house then house rules can be freely adopted.

Therefore prefer the IG, Eldar +Ork armies weren't needlessly meddled with more than armies that basically you never see in tournies had slight tweaks.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Sun Mar 23, 2008 12:59 pm ]
Post subject:  F-ERC IG changes
I have come across (the) view it (Random commissars) is a bit of fun in a GAME

Then every army should get the same silly rule.

Everybody I have spoken to thinks Vultures are fine with the new skimmer rules.

You've spoken to me though. :p

black legion are ... very well balanced

Now I know you're joking. ;)

Admittedly, I only support five changes to the BL list, but they are important changes.

I would ask if you think that Ferals, Siegemasters or Speed Freaks shouldn't get reviewed at all?

I was very disappointed to see that Jervis took the ultra-conservative route with these too.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/