Beleive me, anything which involves more expensive terminators is a burden, not a boon. You can try it yourself. Without the warhound and tbolt prop the cost of marine activations becomes critical.



Really, why is that? The other versions give the long range power, those give the short range power and FF. Seems a 'balanced' close scouting formation that after all gets to point blank range and summons terminators!


If it was 30cm 5/5 yes the freee swap would be fine. However with SF 4/4 its too much of a boost for devs.


Problem with that is balance. The double las (2x4+) is weaker than the double autocannon (2x4/5). Also the double autocannon might be trickier to make than the missile launcher or las ones!

Oh the 400 is to take into account the fearless? (I have mentally deleted fearless from the basic terminators already!)
The assault would be a basic choice for a 3/1 formation. You have the shooting attack and otherwise have the boosted alpha strike. The second terminator formation might be standard but the first would always be this to account for the anti reaver and the like attack. And if the cost is to account for the CC you have in fact weakened the options. The assault terminators as a whole - I seem to remember in space hulk and 40k always trying to include a heavy weapon with the terminators reguardless of whether the rest had cc or storm bolters.


If it was up to me we would have plasma armed speeders from 1st edition!



4/6 is still a boost as the marines tend to use infantry to fight infantry, and thats a boost, especially as you like to be within 30cm!
The not for free thing just brings in min maxing.

I believe that is what it currently is


More like BL has the good ideas and I just tried to stop him playing 40k

30cm AP4+/AT6+ would be the WhES stats for Plasma Cannons.

And yes the current option for Mortis Dreadnoughts is 2 x Twin Missle Launcher or 2 x Twin Lascannon.
Yes you could do 2 x Twin Autocannons but the stats are identical to Twin Missile Launchers

Well the above list is a combined effort of TRC and me So we both are Sub-AC of the Dark Angels.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

I thought the idea actually was 2 missile launchers, as the marine dred carries a single on each arm.

So 2x45cm AT4+ or 2x45cm AP5+/AT6+? 2x45cm AP4+/AT5+ is superior to both.

A right. Mortis has 2 "ordinary" Missile Launchers not Twin-linked ones. My bad.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Not ready.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

I think the list is pretty uncontenious, at least it is to me if I post it in a sec with my take on the suggestions above!

I think we only need to remove Fearless from the Deathwing Terminators (and add the second Assault Cannon) and thats it?

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Well, I would for getting something published right this second reckon that this is 99% balanced. Some stuff is more powerful, but thats to try and compensate for the loss of warhounds and thunderbolts. Possibly the only too powerful formation is the ravenwing 1(s). But that's by 25 points if that's the case. The number of new units is cut right down but still the army builds and plays differently to regular marines. Anything remotely odd is gone, indeed I'd be happy to face it in a tourney as is.

Is the "Teleport Homer" rule really seeing much use? Just seems unnecessary to me.

It isn't in the EpicUK version.

However I have used it in the NetEA version as it can start garrisoned, so a turn 2 teleport after movement and firing turn 1 is very viable.

Still quite viable without it, it's the scouting elements that make it worthwhile, not the potential to re-roll an unlikely bad teleport roll; unless you're teleporting a lot of Terminators, this might effect one roll, one turn, per game. Again just doesn't seem needed.

Second issue, since the Masters all have fearless, shouldn't they cost a bit more than normal Marine Commanders?