Hell, with that adaptions that list all of a sudden becomes quite flexible in styles and fun which would be a welcome compensation for the missing demons/assault power

It’s official! Iron Warriors v3.1 is approved and incorporated into the NetEA Tournament Pack!

A huge thank you to everyone who’s contributed battle reports and constructive criticism to get us here, and especially to Onyx for all the work he put in to get the list to this final, approved state!

The published list can be found here: http://www.tp.net-armageddon.org

_________________
My General Modelling Blog: http://armiger84.blogspot.com/

My Battlefleet Gothic Project Log: http://www.forum.specialist-arms.com/index.php?topic=5318.0

Well done!

_________________
Let us playtest like the Greeks of old... You know the ones I mean

NICE ONE!

Time to plaster that news all over the various FB groups!

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

Poking my head back in after some prodding from Dave to let folks know I'm not dead and that the v3.2 playtest changes are coming.

I've just been quiet due to a combination of work priorities, collecting a little more input, and putting together a playtest document. Anticipating I'll have something up here in a new topic in the next week or two (before Christmas, I promise).

_________________
My General Modelling Blog: http://armiger84.blogspot.com/

My Battlefleet Gothic Project Log: http://www.forum.specialist-arms.com/index.php?topic=5318.0

First round suggested playtest changes are posted here:
http://www.taccmd.tacticalwargames.net/viewtopic.php?f=82&t=34161

Looking forward to everybody's thoughts & feedback!

_________________
My General Modelling Blog: http://armiger84.blogspot.com/

My Battlefleet Gothic Project Log: http://www.forum.specialist-arms.com/index.php?topic=5318.0

Would it be possible to add additional fortified positions to the IW Force list? For example, allow a retinue to purchase trenches, and bunkers in addition to the Gun Emplacement currently available. I bring this addendum up because the Gun Emplacement can only be purchased for each armored vehicle unit and this Formation, Retinue, does not come standard with any vehicles.

It might be worth looking into, but I'd want to really look into whether it's justifiable and what it does to gameplay before committing to anything. When the list was originally formulated, it was meant to be the "Attack" to the Imperial Fists' "Defense" thematically.

With the exception of the artillery (ok, and Defilers), your weaponry is largely limited to 45cm or shorter ranges, forcing you to close with your opponent and push for those siege assaults.

Retooling the Iron Warriors list to lean heavily into defensive positions could be done, but would shift away from the theme & design intent.

_________________
My General Modelling Blog: http://armiger84.blogspot.com/

My Battlefleet Gothic Project Log: http://www.forum.specialist-arms.com/index.php?topic=5318.0

Gotcha, I was thinking of IW from the lore, so trenches and razor wire not static defenses like a bunker or large buildings. This way there can be a garrison of infantry to support the ordnance.

I totally understand that approach, and it does sound and feel totally thematic too - but the list, as designed, tends to leave you really fighting to find the balance between activation count and unit effectiveness. Dedicating a formation of infantry to artillery defense - without also having them mounted up to roll out and claim an objective when the time is right - can leave you at a serious activation & board control disadvantage against your opponent.

Pros and Cons. When I need a rearguard, I'll often used mech'd up Chosen, or a Dreadnought formation (assuming they're not drop-podding). Defilers, coming back from getting broken on turn 1 from concentrated fire, work pretty well that way too


Edit:

I could explore adding trenches in the playtest list if people want. Not everything *needs* to be competitive to be a part of an army list.

_________________
My General Modelling Blog: http://armiger84.blogspot.com/

My Battlefleet Gothic Project Log: http://www.forum.specialist-arms.com/index.php?topic=5318.0

I have yet to play a game of epic and I am just learning the rules, so my opinion on this is purely out of thinking IW go well with trenches and I have always enjoyed a good trench network. Plus it just seemed like if it was worth putting in to other army builders, why not IW as well, since they do it a lot. Probably too deep of a rabbit hole for the purposes of NetEA.

TLDR; It definitely seems like Trenches would hardly see any use in the competitive scene and thus would only be added for fluff reasons not to upset IW meta.

As one of the guys in my gaming group loves to say, trenches are the nicest gift you can give your opponent around your Blitz objective.

_________________
My General Modelling Blog: http://armiger84.blogspot.com/

My Battlefleet Gothic Project Log: http://www.forum.specialist-arms.com/index.php?topic=5318.0

So why not just talk it out with your opponent whether its OK to use trenches?

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2018-05-15