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

Splitting the LatD list up
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=82&t=25761		 Page 1 of 5
Author:  Steve54 [ Wed Aug 14, 2013 7:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Splitting the LatD list up
At the moment, together with Baran, LatD is probably the least used 'Core' list for a variety of reasons, primarily it is a bit of a bloated kitchen-sink of a list with a confused theme.

I'd like to try and split the list into 3 lists
- Traitor Guard - newly turned IG
- Cultists - more Chaotic and corrupted but still with vestiges of IG
- Lost and the Damned - full blown Chaos with only slight IG pieces representing a Chaos world
Author:  Dave [ Wed Aug 14, 2013 8:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Splitting the LatD list up
I can't see there being a notable difference between Traitor Guard and regular IG.

As to the other two, I can see a split like that. Before we tear it down, is the list as it is now beyond balance however?
Author:  jimmyzimms [ Wed Aug 14, 2013 8:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Splitting the LatD list up
Between existing Guard and Bloody Hand I think the first is pretty well covered. The only version / variation I can think of that one could make a pretty convincing case for would instead be a Chaotic Mirror to the Saranes Expanse Crusade list as a Traitor Legion + Traitor Guard combo and even that's wandering close into Vraksian traitors, no?
Author:  fredmans [ Wed Aug 14, 2013 8:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Splitting the LatD list up
Dave wrote:
I can't see there being a notable difference between Traitor Guard and regular IG.

As to the other two, I can see a split like that. Is the list as it is now beyond balance however?


For what it is worth, I think the main problem is the severe restrictions (1:1) forcing you to rely heavily on mechanized covens with Traitor Guard Support formations. Despite being a "kitchen-sink" list, it is the most restrictive Epic list I have ever come across. 1:1 ratio between one core formation and the plethora of support formations plus faction rules. Basically, you need scouts, AA and T-bolts to make it work. The daemon engines (that should be the reason you play the list in the first place) see less use. If you could move what you call Lost and the Damned in that direction, I think it could be worth the effort.

For traitor guards, I think the Vraks list is a good example of a traitor IG with flavour. Straight-up traitors could just as well use the Steel Legion list. The problem is to come up with a traitor theme and stick to it.

/Fredmans
Author:  Ulrik [ Wed Aug 14, 2013 10:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Splitting the LatD list up
Steve54 wrote:
At the moment, together with Baran, LatD is probably the least used 'Core' list for a variety of reasons, primarily it is a bit of a bloated kitchen-sink of a list with a confused theme.


I'm all in favor of such a split. There are lists already in the compendium that are nice for traitor guard - so the challenge would be to make a cultist list and a daemon world list different enough.

Quote:
- Cultists - more Chaotic and corrupted but still with vestiges of IG


Some thoughts about cultists:

- They should be ramshackle. They're a hodgepodge of different types of soldiers and warriors with more fanaticism than actual skill or discipline.
- I think the Ork way of building formations (base units + any kind of upgrades you want) isn't necessarily the best way to go here - formations rarely take more than a few types of upgrade, if they take any at all. An idea I had a few years ago is to rather make the base units of a formation a mix of various types, and if the unit mix is poor in actual play, so much the better. Give the formation a slight discount and let the player figure out how to use his rabble in the best way. Example: 4 infantry, 3 mutants, 2 tanks and a SPG (Griffon or maybe even a Basilisk). The idea is that various leaders gather up a bunch of followers and coalesce into a larger army. They're not going to give up their shiny toys just because tanks or artillery work better massed.
- Could a "daemonic possession" character upgrade for vehicles work? Basically the cultists have captured some piece of equipment (a tank, a farm vehicle or maybe even a war engine) and summoned a daemon to control it.
- I'd love to see an army that actually rolled the majority of its initiative tests on 3+ (unlike Orks who are built to go for their bonuses), but that might not be playable.
Author:  SpeakerToMachines [ Wed Aug 14, 2013 11:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Splitting the LatD list up
Ulrik wrote:
Some thoughts about cultists:

- They should be ramshackle. They're a hodgepodge of different types of soldiers and warriors with more fanaticism than actual skill or discipline.
[...snip...]
- I'd love to see an army that actually rolled the majority of its initiative tests on 3+ (unlike Orks who are built to go for their bonuses), but that might not be playable.


The Insurgency! armies (various flavours here) actually tries to do this, and should be extensible with a Chaotic flavour without too much trouble.
Author:  Onyx [ Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Splitting the LatD list up
I'd like to see the Vraks list in the mix somewhere.
Author:  Jaggedtoothgrin [ Thu Aug 15, 2013 2:31 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Splitting the LatD list up
as people have said, right now, there are a couple of options for Traitor Guard lists
there is the Bloody Hand list for daemon assisted guard
there is the entirety of the IG section, for guards that are traitor in name only (which is not a problem btw, bring on the 'counts as')
in particularly, the mossinians, steel legion, and baran seigemasters are all suitably chaosifiable
there is the Vraks list, for guard who want cool imperial tanks that the imperium hardly have access to anymore but don't want to give up their commissars to do so.
oh, and i gather there's some sort of Lost and the Damned list, for those who want their traitor guard to mostly have other stuff.

Lost and the Damned split is, as was discussed earlier, a good idea. I don't think it needs a Chaos IG section, as we've got that covered fairly well already
but a Daemon list and a Cultist list would be good (though i'd imagine the cultist list would be heavy on daemon support)

Tiny Tim and I were discussing this idea a while back. what happened with that?
Author:  Tiny-Tim [ Thu Aug 15, 2013 8:23 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Splitting the LatD list up
I moved to a different role and kept Orks but dropped LatD.

I would certainly like to see the list streamlined and broken up into more defined lists rather than the mish-mash that it currently is. As I've said here and at many tournaments if I was an Imperial Commander and heard that there was any kind of Cultist/Traitor problem the first thing that I'd do is destroy all the Hydras on the planet closely followed by locking up any pilots and Rough Riders until their loyalty is confirmed.

Allied support between the two lists will be fine as it will let those who have completed armies still play them (to a greater or lesser degree).
Author:  novemberrain [ Thu Aug 15, 2013 10:13 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Splitting the LatD list up
Woah! Slow down guys

We talked through this recently and came to the decision that it was best to leave well alone.

LatD is an established list which people have armies for, it has decent external balanced, has been play tested ALOT, and while it has some dodgy internal balance it is no worse than say Marines with their Warhounds and Dreadnoughts.

We went through all this in this thread:http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=82&t=22194

But you want to split it up and wreck one of the few approved chaos lists? I just don't understand why people want to destroy a list that is APPROVED in favour of a whole host of new lists most of which, lets face it, will never get played / tested / approved!

What on earth has brought it all back?
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Thu Aug 15, 2013 11:04 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Splitting the LatD list up
Quote:
But you want to split it up and wreck one of the few approved chaos lists? I just don't understand why people want to destroy a list that is APPROVED in favour of a whole host of new lists most of which, lets face it, will never get played / tested / approved!

It would continue to NetEA's "backwards progress" over the last few years, at least. :-p
Author:  Jaggedtoothgrin [ Thu Aug 15, 2013 11:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Splitting the LatD list up
i think its a pretty big stretch to suggest that "we agreed" that it wouldnt work, when the thread in question was basically a whole bunch of people suggesting ways to improve the list, and three people saying "I don't like it" over and over again.
Author:  novemberrain [ Thu Aug 15, 2013 11:42 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Splitting the LatD list up
Duplicate post
Author:  novemberrain [ Thu Aug 15, 2013 11:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Splitting the LatD list up
novemberrain wrote:
Are you serious?!

That thread reads very differently to me - lots of people whinging, not doing a lot, and then ignoring the lists etc given to them which supported keeping the list the same.

Those ways of improving the list are backward steps and fundamentally destructive. If people want other lists detailing cult uprisings or traitor guard in isolation then get off your backsides and make them, and get them play tested, and get them approved. Don't wreck one of only two(!) approved chaos lists for no good reason.

Why exactly does the Lost and the Damned list NEED to be cut into pieces?
Page 1 of 5 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/