Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 84 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51

 Post subject: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 3:23 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 2:54 pm
Posts: 306
I've taken the liberty of stickying the most recent Thurgrimm Army List at the top of this forum. I guess in the absence of any update rules since Dec 2013 this is the most 'approved' list we've got.

I've made a single change to 1.5, and included the missing rules for the Goliath that was mistakenly left off the 1.5 document.

Boy that had been annoying me for months now.

I've advanced the version number to 1.51 to reflect the changes. If there are any other typos or errors I didn't catch, please notify me so I can fix it right away.


Attachments:
Thugrimm 1.51 Army List.pdf [467.25 KiB]
Downloaded 734 times
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 3:30 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 7:30 am
Posts: 1473
Location: Örebro, Sweden
As per discussion in one of the other threads. Kyrt (I think) made some good comments about the spotter rule and how it's worded in regards to the doomsday cannon. I too think it needs to be rewritten in a more clear way.

Btw I just saw that the overlord airship has 75 cm range on the autocannons? Is that a typo? Seems a bit much and I don't remeber that from back when I used to play the list.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 3:46 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 8:01 pm
Posts: 1404
Overlord should be 45cm auto, 75 battlecannons.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 3:47 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 2:54 pm
Posts: 306
Borka wrote:
As per discussion in one of the other threads. Kyrt (I think) made some good comments about the spotter rule and how it's worded in regards to the doomsday cannon. I too think it needs to be rewritten in a more clear way.

Btw I just saw that the overlord airship has 75 cm range on the autocannons? Is that a typo? Seems a bit much and I don't remeber that from back when I used to play the list.


Tightening up the wording of the rules is definitely something that we are looking at doing, but for now I am just posting up the original list from 2013 with the errors removed!

I've filled down the autocannon barrels so that they are now 45cm. Good catch.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 3:57 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 8:01 pm
Posts: 1404
Nice one on getting goliaths onto the stat sheet. New army champion win for you.

Ps I think the bomb rack range should be 15 cm not 45. That would be filthy.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 4:15 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 2:54 pm
Posts: 306
StevekCole wrote:
Nice one on getting goliaths onto the stat sheet. New army champion win for you.

Ps I think the bomb rack range should be 15 cm not 45. That would be filthy.


Hmmmm, the source files given to me must have been corrupted. I've fixed the overlord but I'll have to comb through the whole document to fins any others.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Wed Aug 26, 2015 6:22 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid

Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:35 am
Posts: 3224
Location: Norrköping, Sweden.
Please make sure that the WE:s dont have 4+ in CC. They should be more vunerable to terminator attacks and other formations making it all the way into base to base with them.

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/

"You have a right to be offended" - Steve Hughes
"Your feelings are hurting my thoughts" - Aron Flam


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:45 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:51 am
Posts: 270
mordoten wrote:
Please make sure that the WE:s dont have 4+ in CC. They should be more vunerable to terminator attacks and other formations making it all the way into base to base with them.


4+cc or 5+cc Is the difference between 2 and 1.5 hits in CC(Leviathan) and 3 and 2 hits(4 car land train) in an assault.

The removing of void shields and 1-2 extra FF attacks by making it into CC is a lot more significant.
As is whether the opponent has prepped, has inspiring, macro etc.

I don't think it's really necessary?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Thu Aug 27, 2015 6:30 am 
Hybrid
Hybrid

Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:35 am
Posts: 3224
Location: Norrköping, Sweden.
So you think it's fine for a WE thats focused on dealing lots of ranged damage to also be good i CC. Ok.

_________________
https://epic40ksweden.wordpress.com/

"You have a right to be offended" - Steve Hughes
"Your feelings are hurting my thoughts" - Aron Flam


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Thu Aug 27, 2015 6:59 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:51 am
Posts: 270
Being that Squat war engines are the main strength of this list I think it's fine for them to be good all-rounders. Lots of other war engines in Epic are good at ranged fire and assaults.
4+ cc makes more sense for those WE that are described as having dwarf warriors(Bezerker battle cars/leviathan) that fight alongside them.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Thu Aug 27, 2015 7:21 am 
Hybrid
Hybrid

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:32 pm
Posts: 4701
Location: North Yorkshire
Bearing in mine the list suffers, intentionally, from a lack of scouts and the war engines are the mainstay of the list, I would say that the CC 4+ is justified. I have certainly lost plenty of Squat WEs in games to teleporters and air assaults.

I would also note that there are already WE with CC 4+ the Decimator comes straight to mind.

_________________
_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk - home of the UK Epic tournament scene
NetEA NetERC Xenos Lists Chair
NetEA Ork + Feral Ork + Speed Freak Champion


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Thu Aug 27, 2015 8:39 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 8:01 pm
Posts: 1404
I'd agree on 4+ cc being justified. I've lost every single type of squat WE to terminators/assault troops in my time. A colossus close assaulted by terminators should take something like 3 macro and 3 regular hits dealing 1 in return. It's gonna lose every time. They're not scout titans or super heavy tanks but something quite different. Which is reflected as Tim says in weaknesses across the army.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Thu Aug 27, 2015 10:50 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:14 am
Posts: 3416
Location: Western Australia
I would like to see the War Engine CC changed.
4+ is just too good.

Comparison to a daemon possessed war engine that turns peoples stomachs inside out (see Storm of Iron for details) to a squat driven mega tank is not a fair comparison.

It is really maddening when facing Squats to see 4+CC on WE's.

Claiming that the WE's are escorted by Dwarf warriors is not really on. If that's the case, then the Iron Warriors Ordinatus will be going to CC4+ as it would be guarded by angry Chaos Marines... (joking of course).

All Squat WE's should probably be CC6+ and they should be protected by other parts of the army (just like every other list has to do).

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Thu Aug 27, 2015 11:07 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 8:01 pm
Posts: 1404
4+ cc or not you still have to protect the things with infantry etc. As Tim says, no cheap scouts etc to keep them safe. In terms of the unit. Going back to some of the previous debates about squats, not that helpful just to compare to units in other armies. As a whole I'd say the list is currently mid tier at best, so why start debuffing before any other changes are made. In terms of fluff you can always make the argument either way (ie they're covered in gun emplacements, flame throwers etc yes but they're not terrifying daemons, yes but they're castles in wheels etc). The big, big weakness of the war engines is their speed and a good opponent will exploit that (not need to destroy them but to make you sacrifice faster units to defend them rather than grab objectives).

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Thu Aug 27, 2015 11:32 am 
Purestrain
Purestrain
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:14 am
Posts: 3416
Location: Western Australia
No cheap scouts is true enough...
Of course you can have things like Mole Mortars, garrisoned on Overwatch though. Not a bad deal at 175pts.

I also find that there seems to be too much overlap in the mega tanks.
I understand what each type does but really, they just seem to be big guns with a few details to separate them.
I'd like to see more specialisation in each WE and make their rolls clearer.
I understand the whole jack of all trades thing as they are often all that's left after the bugs ate it all but in gaming terms it could do with clearing up.
Modifying the CC values could be part of this?

And to continue a discussion from way back, the Mole Mortar has to change from Disrupt to Ignore Cover.

*edit - also another +1 to removing the Spotter rule all together (and removing indirect fire from the Doomsday Cannons).
The Squat list is a well above average list in it's current state.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 84 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net