They're also basically a direct copy of the Russian KV-2, the metalist of all tanks. This means the Ragnarock is probably the single best designed tank in the whole of 40k purely by accident.

Ahh I see, thank you for clearing that up to me. I based my countings upon the 2012.08.09. Army List Compendium, currently being the latest on net-armageddon. Though I was aware that some of the lists are already changed, but didn't thought that the compendium is really outdated now. I guess the guys currently work on it, as the Tournament Pack just got out.

Back to Ragnarocks I agree on walker ability is useful (especially passing through my very own trenchwork ), but still I think garrisoning Ragnaroks is the most strong feature of the formation, as the enemy are forced to deal with it, protecting the more fragile artillery at the back. Should the enemy focus on artillery and the massive tank cannons and reinforced armor will break the lines.

I have found having lots of threatening formations being an excellent counter for losing the first strike with strategy 1. Even Eldar cannot deal with that many at once!

_________________
Epic Commander of the Prassium Invasion Troops 214th Regiment
***Action is our prayer. Victory is our offering.***

I played with a following against Blood Angel (although it would mostly do for many types of enemies);

HQ + Thudd - 300
Inf + Thudd - 250
Inf + Rapier - 250
Inf + Rapier - 250
Inf - 175
Sapper - 250 (not splitted)
Siegfried - 150
AA - 100
AA - 100
AA - 100
AA - 100
Götter - 150
Götter - 150
Götter - 150
T-bolt - 150
T-bolt - 150
Fort - 75
Fort - 75
Fort - 75

16 activations. My opponent felt that the high amount of formations are overpowered. I looked after the UK version of Baran, where all the formations which I spammed here, received points increase, resulting an average number of formations drop by two. In concrete numbers it looks like this;

HQ + Thudd - 300
Inf + Thudd - 250
Inf + Rapier - 250
Inf + Rapier - 250
Inf - 175
Sapper - 200 (-50, Cannot be splitted, FF5+ >>> FF4+)
Siegfried - 175 (+25)
AA - 150 (+50, AP6+ >>> AP5+, Bruenhilde move 15 cm >>> 20 cm)
AA - 150 (+50, AP6+ >>> AP5+, Bruenhilde move 15 cm >>> 20 cm)
AA - 150 (+50, AP6+ >>> AP5+, Bruenhilde move 15 cm >>> 20 cm)
AA - 150 (+50, AP6+ >>> AP5+, Bruenhilde move 15 cm >>> 20 cm)
Götter - 175 (+25)
Götter - 175 (+25)
Götter - 175 (+25)
T-bolt - 150
T-bolt - 150
Fort - 100 (+25)
Fort - 100 (+25)
Fort - 100 (+25)
Summa = 3325, must drop approximately two formations to hit the upper limit.

I feel the current EpicUK version more balanced for NetE:A lists compared to the current NetE:A one. But I came to ask your opinion about this.
So the question is up! Which version is more balanced?

_________________
Epic Commander of the Prassium Invasion Troops 214th Regiment
***Action is our prayer. Victory is our offering.***

Baran do seem to always have an activation advantage over the opponent, in either of the rules sets.

I think this is offset by their abysmal strategy rating, which often means the opponent has the opportunity to destroy or cripple formations before they have a chance to activate, the relatively small sizes of their formations (only 10 Infantry stands for example), and the likelihood that the opponent can call combined assaults on multiple formations at once as Baran tends to like to bunch up behind fortifications

_________________
My EPIC and BFG Blog: https://epicaddiction.wordpress.com/

Yep, that happened often for my first battles. But now I always take the time to pre-measure those 5.1 cm to avoid multi losses. Yet drop pods, templates (especially spacecraft) are still a danger, but with this many unit at 3000 point I had space with the above list to spread out and thus lessen their effectivity.

_________________
Epic Commander of the Prassium Invasion Troops 214th Regiment
***Action is our prayer. Victory is our offering.***

The other point is that Siege lists tend to be very static. Their strength (fortifications and numbers) is also their weakness. Basically once set up, the opponent has the battlefield initiative and can concentrate on one side of the Baran army which they can struggle to counter-act, especially if the opponent can occupy the fortifications.

The original Swordwind lists were considered significantly overpowered and as such I would tend to use the UK variant rather than NetEA because it tends to cut down on activations, making it harder for the Siegies to load up on masses of artillery. In the tournament game their main issue is actually being able to capture any objectives in the opponents table half - usually done by the light tanks which must be protected at all costs for a third turn dash . . .

As such having 16+ formations is not totally overpowered as they are needed to act as reserves, counter-attackers etc. Consequently games involving Barans (and other siege armies) play very differently with different strategies and tactics.

One of my favorive things I reead in the Flames of War rulebook was about declaritive movement and measurement; when you put two formations close to each other, make a point of measuring their seperation and agree with your opponent that they're more than 5cm apart. This saves loads of disagreement later on about whether formations are intermingled, or within 15cm to contest an objective etc.
Makes for a much more plesent game all round.

Totally agree Mike - it also saves time as well

Question: With the sapper rule, could you just add the whole sapper formation to an Infantry company? Or would you have to take a minimum of one unit and give it to one formation, then add the remaining seven units to another formation in order to comply with the "split up" wording of the rule?

_________________
"Live off the land. Go to find war. Kill wot comes close. The old ways are best." - Grodd, Ork Snakebite Runtherd

His list worked. Won the tournament in Raaba, Austria...

_________________
Gregster's Lab - 3D designed 6mm stuff

STL files at Vanguard Miniatures

To be precise, it was exactly this build:

HQ Company + Infantry Platoon + Hellhound (425, BTS)
Infantry Company + Rapier Platoon (250)
Infantry Company + Rapier Platoon (250)
Infantry Company (175)
Infantry Company (175)
Siegfried (150)
------------------------------- Commissars placed to the above
Flak with Bruennhildes (100)
Flak with Bruennhildes (100)
Flak with Bruennhildes (100)
Flak with Bruennhildes (100)
Howitzer with Bruennhildes (150)
Howitzer with Bruennhildes (150)
Howitzer with Bruennhildes (150)
Howitzer with Bruennhildes (150)
Deathstrike (200)
T-bolt (150)
T-bolt (150)
Fortification, bunkers chosen (75)

And to be honest, I think they haven't faced Baran before, so I had a clear advantage beacuse of it.
But yeah, the list worked properly, the Commissar is pleased.

_________________
Epic Commander of the Prassium Invasion Troops 214th Regiment
***Action is our prayer. Victory is our offering.***

Now THAT is a siege list.

Very hard if unprepared

_________________
Epic Armageddon in Spanish (from Spain): http://www.box.net/shared/3u5vr8a370

Konig Armoured Regiment FanList: https://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd ... 41#p581941

No one have faced Baran before this event. I'd like to see this list against my AMTL or Minervans. Maybe in Budapest in May...

Baran is unusual in tournaments - partly because of the setup time. Holt has made a smart choice by minimising the fortifications that are a main cause of this.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

Servus!

It would really suffer against AMTL, but I run Minervans and struggle to think of any list good to beat those Barans, other than templates, templates and templates.

_________________
Epic Armageddon in Spanish (from Spain): http://www.box.net/shared/3u5vr8a370

Konig Armoured Regiment FanList: https://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd ... 41#p581941