Lots of things to unpack here….might be a long post (warning, contains a lot of personal thoughts that you may agree or disagree with).
McJakub - I agree with your last comment, 100%.
On sense of direction - this was materially changed between v3 and v4. With v2 and v3, the direction was always to get a playable force based on the IA rules. The last version, v3 was based on the IA8 Elysian army list. It had progressional development from the v2 rules which were based on earlier Elysian IA lists. The common point was, the underlying direction was always to get an Epic version of the Elysian’s that were playable. The shift came in v4, where the direction became develop a more competitive list. I’m not making a statement about this being right or wrong, just stating what has been stated in this thread, and why there has been a change of direction.
Now, my personal view, the change of direction isn’t the correct one. Sorry Deb, I like some of the stuff you’ve done with the list for sure, but fundamentally don’t think the Elysians should really be developed into a more competitive list. On this point, I’d like to reference what was written in the IA8 Elysian list:
“What is the appeal of an Elysian Drop Troop Army? Well, I think it can be summed up in two words: air power. If you enjoy the adrenaline rush of fast jets then this is the army for out. You get aircraft, lots of aircraft, and you get high-tech, elite soldiers plunging from the skies directly into battle - pretty cool!
This army’s true advantage lie in its speed, unpredictability, and unrivaled ability to attack anywhere on the tabletop, anytime. Using deep strikes and Valkyries, the Elysians can capture objectives rapidly by dint of overwhelming force and their close range firepower, often relying on demo charges and special weapons for tank-busting. Failing this, look to the skies. Vultures, Valkyries, and Imperial Navy aircraft pack fearsome amounts of firepower, and swooping over the table they can target just about anything. Tactical flexibility is the Elysians’ true advantage over most other forces, and a commander that learns to use that flexibility well will find their are few situations the Elysians cannot counter quickly and effectively.
Elysians are, by their nature, better suited to some scenarios than others. With their many Deep Striking and fast moving units, they are adept at capturing objectives. This is their forte. Pitched battles and annihilation missions, whilst not impossible, will be a more difficult proposition. Certain enemies also pose a serious problem for mobile light infantry force.
….
As an Elysian commander you will need to think hard about where and when to attack….Valkyries provide a measure of control over an Elysian force that grav-chutes do not. Grav-chuting is more hit and miss and for an entire force fraught with danger.
This is a specialized force, and I would suggest not a forgiving one for inexperienced commanders. Being Drop Troops, the Elysians lack many of the heavy weapons needed to defeat the enemy’s heaviest equipment and vehicles….Elysians commanders should not expect to engage the enemy in a conventional stand-up fight and win. Instead, they should seek to take objectives by rapid hard-hitting attacks and then hold them with grim determination and selective targeting of enemy threats. Casualties will often be high, but that is the price Drop Troop regiments pay for their mobility. “
So trying to make them into a more balanced and competitive force goes against all of the above that written about the force. We should definitely seek to ensure they are not overpowered, but evenly balanced is not something this list really is meant to be.
Aircraft…lots of aircraft, it’s stated in the description. We should be building a list to relies on this, even if they aren’t always the best tabletop option. We could always reduce points for aircraft as they may not be worth as much in this list given their canonical lack of AA support.
Fluff…yes, we’ve gotten away from wanting to create a playable canonical force, as stated. Canon has been sacrificed for competitiveness. Since the first two lists adhered strongly to canon as an underlying principal, this has left you feeling it’s deviated from the original idea, and I share the feeling.
There is heavy disagreement on the changes, and lots of opinions - but I think this is rooted in the list direction. People like myself who want a playable canonical force have very different opinions to those who want a more competitively playable list. Neither is right or wrong, just different.
So, what would I do if I were making a V4 list - a number of things Deb has already done. Increase formation size (probably a good thing). Increase Sentinel unit sizes, also a good and canonical thing. Changing their teleport rules to group planetfall, again, probably a good call by Deb. Changing the way mortar squads work, also a good call. Creating more sentinel units, again, another great call by Deb, and fits in with canon.
What would I have not done - added any non-canonical units, and any new special rules that didn’t already exist. They are purely there to create more competitiveness IMHO. Grey Ghosts and Sabres fall into this bucket. Totally get why they were added, and I agree it makes it more competitive, but if creating a canonical and playable list is still the direction of v4, then these are not the right direction.
What would I also look to do. Possibly more specialist squads, maybe an upgrade to have a specialist squad with demo charges and meltas to give the army a bit more chance against armor and big things. You could develop one unit to be much more focused on attacking the big guys (armor or titans) and it wouldn’t break the list at all. I’d also look at more aircraft options, I agree with McJakub - avengers would be nice and very fitting. Theres really no aircraft that should be off limits to the list. In a nutshell, I’d look for more canonical ways to make the list more competitive, but draw the line at anything not in current cannon doesn’t go int the list.
A lot of my own personal opinions in this post, and you may not agree with them all. Totally OK, and while I may not always agree with yours, I do respect them and understand where they come from (most of the time).
|