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

Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51

 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2016 2:48 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 2:54 pm
Posts: 306
jimmyzimms wrote:
you're better off just stating in the specials that Indirect Fire doesn't double range and call it good. I'm all about trying to keep units moving (EA is a game of maneuver warfare after all and gets a bit crap when units only work well sitting and sustaining) but I'm a fan of making things easy as well. If you wanted flavor you're better off just thieving the marker-light mechanics from Tau.



It's not the 'double range' that I worry about. It's the playstyle that it could encourage where the entire squat army becomes an 'artillery train' that sits back and shoots indirectly. It's not particularly fun to play with or against.

I also play Dwarves in warhammer fantasy (pre Age of Sigmar) and that army has the design mistake where it is just better off to take a lot of artillery, castle up in a corner and shoot.

It is one of the reasons I am hoping to get the thunderfire AA mobile as well.


Another thing to think about is that the Squat War Engines are notoriously tough. The opposing player would probably hate playing a squat army if there is all this MW barrage being lobbed over the hill and there is nothing they can do about it.

With the concept of the spotter rule it allows the opponent the opportunity to shoot down the fragile squat skimmers to prevent the barrage. Something many times more 'fun', tactical and engaging for both players.

While the chief aim of this army re-write is to achieve a 'balanced' army list, if I end up making one that is bland and boring then I have failed as an AC.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2016 3:00 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:14 am
Posts: 3416
Location: Western Australia
Elsaurio wrote:
It's not the 'double range' that I worry about. It's the playstyle that it could encourage where the entire squat army becomes an 'artillery train' that sits back and shoots indirectly. It's not particularly fun to play with or against.
The ability to double the range of the Squat big guns is a problem though.
It's also not really necessary as Squats already have access excellent Indirect Fire weapons.

Quote:
Another thing to think about is that the Squat War Engines are notoriously tough. The opposing player would probably hate playing a squat army if there is all this MW barrage being lobbed over the hill and there is nothing they can do about it.
The Spotter rule and the Indirect Fire on all the notoriously tough War Engines contributes to this problem.
Removing the concept entirely does not make the list bland and will encourage Squat players to move forwards.

Balance must always trump fluff.

_________________
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: Wed Apr 06, 2016 3:09 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 8035
Location: Manalapan, FL
I'm with you but the weapons then should be short(er) ranged and why, must I ask, are they so tough then? Should they be all full of Hot MW death? Should any of them even have indirect? Why are they barrage weapons? There's no rule that they HAVE to be that way. If we're trying to balance some stuff then why do we need a wonky rule to counteract when another preexisting one well understood could probably be leveraged?

If the goal is to make something that isn't a bit bland then anything should be open and not sacrosant even if that means douching the list. My biggest issue with the history of squat lists is the inability to pull itself away from trying to be SM2 ported to EA stats instead of being it's own thing but with a few nods towards the history.

Personally they probably work great being proxies for an assault orientated AdMech force but that's just me.

Regardless you're doing good work here and I certainly wouldn't want the headaches you've inherited! I know you'll find the good compromise :D

_________________
The Artist Formerly Known As Marine Army Champion

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2016 3:23 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 2:54 pm
Posts: 306
Onyx wrote:
Elsaurio wrote:
It's not the 'double range' that I worry about. It's the playstyle that it could encourage where the entire squat army becomes an 'artillery train' that sits back and shoots indirectly. It's not particularly fun to play with or against.
The ability to double the range of the Squat big guns is a problem though.
It's also not really necessary as Squats already have access excellent Indirect Fire weapons.

Quote:
Another thing to think about is that the Squat War Engines are notoriously tough. The opposing player would probably hate playing a squat army if there is all this MW barrage being lobbed over the hill and there is nothing they can do about it.
The Spotter rule and the Indirect Fire on all the notoriously tough War Engines contributes to this problem.
Removing the concept entirely does not make the list bland and will encourage Squat players to move forwards.

Balance must always trump fluff.


Which is why I have removed it in the meantime (but it's on top of my list as 'things I'd most like to put back in')


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2016 3:53 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 2:54 pm
Posts: 306
A couple of excellent questions here and I'll try to answer them all.

jimmyzimms wrote:
I'm with you but the weapons then should be short(er) ranged and why, must I ask, are they so tough then? Should they be all full of Hot MW death? Should any of them even have indirect? Why are they barrage weapons? There's no rule that they HAVE to be that way.


1) Squat War Engines are always going to be big slow chunky boxes. That's always going to the theme and reflected in the rules. And there isn't much dispute with them being like this from either a fluff perspective or a balance perspective. Nobody is asking for Squats to be fragile, fast eldar walkers for example)

2) Why should they be MW barrage death? Well a big 500 point war engine is going to have a decent big gun and the fluff has them sharing a big barrage gun called the Doomsday Cannon that shoots shells the size of rhinos. The rules have them as Quake cannons and it's a reasonable fit.

If you also look into the Squat list then you will notice that that outside the war engines the squats don't really have much shooting at all to speak of - not much long range AT fire, almost zero MW and TK. They really lack the great 'killer' units that other armies have. No teleporting terminator death squads. No Shadowswords, no massed Leman Russ.

So squats certainly deserve to have some sort of decent range weapons on the big War Engines. It's kinda their thing.

And when it all comes out in the wash, the squat war engines are pretty much reavers with more restrictive weapon choices. Sure a Quake Cannon is great against that clump of 4+ Space Marines but sometimes you would kill for some different options like a Plasma Destructor or a Volcano cannon -type shot. But nope, Quake Cannon is all they've got.

Quote:
If we're trying to balance some stuff then why do we need a wonky rule to counteract when another preexisting one well understood could probably be leveraged?


3) I once checked all the other main approved lists and apart from Steel Legion, Squats have the *least* number of special rules. Spotter, +1 to rally and halved withdraw (which is a negative). If Tau can have a markerlight rule then surely there exists the space for Squats to have a special rule of their own. And it is less about balance and more about having some 'fun' and 'flavour' in a list that otherwise will play very close to Steel Legion.

But I agree that the way it is written and implement could be less clunky.




Quote:
If the goal is to make something that isn't a bit bland then anything should be open and not sacrosant even if that means douching the list. My biggest issue with the history of squat lists is the inability to pull itself away from trying to be SM2 ported to EA stats instead of being it's own thing but with a few nods towards the history.


4) When EA first dropped there were a number of very different fan-made squat lists put up, all of them with wildly different ideas of what Squats should be. None of those lists got anywhere. it wasn't until years later that Moscovian pulled together the idea of a list that would be as close to 'original squats' as possible. and this theme stuck.

It does have a certain amount of respect, in that a squat player can field a full army of 100% legal GW models (here's looking at you dark eldar and other minor races) but it does mean that is has been harder to achieve balance if we were allowing ourselves to invent anything new (I wish that aircraft and spacecraft models existed!)

Quote:
Personally they probably work great being proxies for an assault orientated AdMech force but that's just me.


You bite your tongue! At least we have more posts and activity than the Inquisition forums (and gaining ground on the ork section... maybe). Not to mention right now on my desk is a big pile of third-party 6mm models that I am going to create a assault-orientated AdMech army with!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2016 4:16 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 8035
Location: Manalapan, FL
ha! Oh I'm with you. It's a tangled bag of snakes you're responsible to lay out straight. I know you're doing a good job because everyone's got a complaint! ;D

I'm just shooting (potentially) sacred cows, nothing specific wrong here. It's just that we can get so caught up in saying, "it must be this way because..." when it's really, "It could be this way...". I mean, for instance the Doomsday cannon. Does it need MW or instead is it better balanced as an 8x attack? (after all the shell is big but maybe it's deploying cluster munitions? :D). The Thunderfires are stationary and x2 because a 25 year old OOP model and obsolete ruleset says so. Does that make them problematic (such as further making the player need to castle)? If so then toss it and they are on tractors with the appropriate costs/adjustments and screw the models that were dumb to begin with.

Now let me make it clear here I'm not actually advocating any specific thing mentioned above (I certainly don't have enough thinking and playing with with them to really offer any specific recommendations). I'm more pointing out that questioning assumptions is just a basic philosophy that's good to perform.

_________________
The Artist Formerly Known As Marine Army Champion

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2016 4:45 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 2:54 pm
Posts: 306
jimmyzimms wrote:
ha! Oh I'm with you. It's a tangled bag of snakes you're responsible to lay out straight. I know you're doing a good job because everyone's got a complaint! ;D

I'm just shooting (potentially) sacred cows, nothing specific wrong here. It's just that we can get so caught up in saying, "it must be this way because..." when it's really, "It could be this way...". I mean, for instance the Doomsday cannon. Does it need MW or instead is it better balanced as an 8x attack? (after all the shell is big but maybe it's deploying cluster munitions? :D)


If so, are you in favour of removing all access to MW from the Squats? The Doomsday cannon has received very little complaints - a squat list is going to have one..maybe two of these max.


Quote:
The Thunderfires are stationary and x2 because a 25 year old OOP model and obsolete ruleset says so. Does that make them problematic (such as further making the player need to castle)? If so then toss it and they are on tractors with the appropriate costs/adjustments and screw the models that were dumb to begin with.
.



Oh THAT sacred cow is going to be taken out the back and shot. I've certainly come to the conclusion that stationary AA combined with no Aircraft is a terrible choice for a army. Take a look at the recently-released Squat Uk list that has towed Thunderfires for a very good example of the direction I want to take them in.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Wed Apr 06, 2016 4:48 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 8035
Location: Manalapan, FL
Quote:
Now let me make it clear here I'm not actually advocating any specific thing mentioned above

*cough cough* ;)

They were illustrative conceptual ideas, not anything real I was suggesting. I was meaning them as a general example of the types and depths of questions I'd ask. Sorry, I could have come up with a far better first example. Poor choice on my part.

_________________
The Artist Formerly Known As Marine Army Champion

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Thu Apr 07, 2016 6:49 am 
Hybrid
Hybrid

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 2:54 pm
Posts: 306
jimmyzimms wrote:
Quote:
Now let me make it clear here I'm not actually advocating any specific thing mentioned above

*cough cough* ;)

They were illustrative conceptual ideas, not anything real I was suggesting. I was meaning them as a general example of the types and depths of questions I'd ask. Sorry, I could have come up with a far better first example. Poor choice on my part.


Not at all, that is why these forums exist, to facilitate and encourage questioning of the rules in order to create a better end product.

And just to clarify; the last paragraph was *agreeing* with your idea - the removal of the static AA even though it has existed in 2nd ed. Both the epic UK and this EA list are dumping the old rules for a rewrite that allows movement


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 9:11 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:17 pm
Posts: 119
Location: Toronto, Canada
Sooo... just checking if there is any timeline for a 1.6 list that we can start playtesting?
I know there's been a bunch of changes discussed (towed thunderfires, +5cm move for bikes, small points drop for Warriors, possible nerfs to Overlord etc). Any chance of getting those consolidated into a new list for us to take for a spin?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2016 3:51 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:17 pm
Posts: 119
Location: Toronto, Canada
Have we lost our AC? :(
Does anyone have contact with Elsaurio? I sent him a PM, but doesnt look like he has picked it up..


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Mon Jun 27, 2016 4:17 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:32 pm
Posts: 4496
Location: North Yorkshire
Hmmm I hope not, but I will check too.

_________________
_________________
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: Tue Jun 28, 2016 1:14 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 2:21 am
Posts: 517
Location: Australia
I'll nudge him guys, give me a sec


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2016 5:08 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 2:01 am
Posts: 214
I think we should just push for approval now, the list seems pretty balanced and in line with the latest approvals.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Squats: Thurgrimm Stronghold v1.51
PostPosted: Tue Jun 28, 2016 8:56 am 
Hybrid
Hybrid

Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:32 pm
Posts: 4496
Location: North Yorkshire
What we need are reports, lots of them. So please feel free to post any games that you have had with the 1.51 list.

_________________
_________________
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  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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