So there were lots of battles between Eldar and Siegemasters?

Maybe my memory is a bit fuzzy.. but I don't remember a single Eldar versus Siegemasters report. But I do recall lots of Eldar v Marines, Eldar v Orks, Eldar v IG.

That was my impression anyway, that the three lists were tested against each other enough that they were balanced in that regard, but as compared to the established lists they were all a bit too good.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Have Feral Orks been changed much since Swordwind?

My impression was that Biel-Tan was over-powered mainly due to the last minute inclusion of Spirit Stones. Something that was included without a great deal of testing against any army, mainly pushed through by vocal Eldar fans.

Siegemasters was simply not tested enough due to the large number of models required and a lack of active fans (it is still rare to see a report with the Barans).

No, though I'd wager that being more down to Feral Ork armies being rarer than Unicorn farts than anything else.


*waggles finger at naughty Eldar players*

Even without Spirt Stones, they're a very strong list.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Apart from spirit stones what else has changed?

For the official lists, only a few things (Like the pulse rule).
But the NetEA list has many modifications to the list.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Bottom line.. other than spirit stones there isn't really a case for the argument that Biel-Tan is over-powered.

Feral Orks are rare, but again, we would see discussion if they were over-powered (cause if they were someone, somewhere would take advantage of that).

Siegemasters had one over-powered playstyle (extreme activation advantage), and again this was probably over looked because of a general lack of playtesting, not due to testing only against Eldar or Ferals.

Conclusion: two of the original swordwind armies were over-powered. But there is no evidence that this was a result of playtesting against each other. One had a last minute addition (that therefore didn't get enough testing of any kind), and the other simply didn't get enough testing period.

I disagree; I just think that Jervis was being overly-cautious when he undertook the 2008 rules review. Things that should have been changed were not changed.


You make a strong argument... but not one that contravenes my own point (That playtesting against established lists is important). Just one that makes me look like a forgetful old fool. :-)

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

let's not get too far from the point of this thread, which is to see if there's any useful information to be gleaned from this playtest.

For one, it would be useful to know if the termies teleported. Secondly, was this a blind list, ie. a SM list that someone would take to a tourney or random game? To me it's the oddest looking marine list I've seen for a loooong time - I've only ever heard of someone having 4 t'bolt fms once, and he didn't even turn up to the tournament. I've also never known anyone to field 3 terminator fms. Not saying that that diminishes the usefulness of the playtest, just that it makes it hard to figure out why you lost. I'd also wager that a little more anti-air (especially as t'bolt fms for the knights) would have helped.

In my mind knights seem like land raiders, little less shooty, little more assaulty (well, quite a bit more), but without the benefit of ATSKNF. Add in the disadvantages of being WE (blocking LoS) which precludes effective large fms and you have small expensive easily broken (and therefore destroyed) fms that absolutely have to get into combat to do anything, though they're then disadvantaged by their small fm size. I think it's going to be a hard list to balance, but I do agree with E&C that playtesting against standard established lists would bring the most benefits the quickest.

They can't teleport in this variant list.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

They can sometimes. It depends on the version he was using.

However, if the list was 3000 points, they didn't, so it's all the same in the end.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

E&C, I should be clear. I am not disagreeing with the case that the ideal playtest is one where an experimental list is pitted against an established list. My point is that in this game that was not the biggest factor, and that to infer that because it wasn't done in this case somehow invalidates the playtest is incorrect.

I would actually go further and say that its not just a case of using an established army for an ideal playtest. IMO ideally they should be done against..
1. One of the original three armies (SM/IG/Orks)
2. The army itself (not just the list) should be a "balanced" army (i.e. not heavy in air or WE or all-inf or all-AV etc etc)
3. The army should also be one that has been proven sucessful to some extent (best case use a list that appeared at a tournament)

@matt I suggested (and MV concurred) that the heavy air of the SMs was a big factor. You have also echoed a lot of what I posted earlier about the unusual SM build that was used. And its seems we also agree on the tentative conclusion regarding the weakness of the knights. The question of whether the SM list was blind (or did they know they were facing knights) is a good one. I hesitate to suggest that meta-gaming was going on but it does look a little like that.

Three Terminator formations that don't teleport or come in via Thunderhawk is highly atypical, as is 800 points of Dreadnoughts, and 4x Thunderbolt formations.

That's almost 2000pts of the 3000pt Marine list being employed in an unusual and largely untested manner; With such a variance from the normal Marine style of play, I think it could well have had a large influence on the outcome of the game, and it's ultimately why I noted that in future, swapping out the Knights or the Marines for a more conventional force (For the testing of either list) might prove more helpful when looking to run tests.

Sorry for dragging the topic off-road for so long, guys, I'll shut up about this now. :-)

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Nothing to add just wanted to make sure anyone just coming in from work,like me,hasn't missed this

I'd actually agree with all of these. You can maybe compromise one of those factors, but the closer you stick to that the more predictable your results will be.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread