Tactical Command

Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2
Page 3 of 3

Author:  Roboshadow [ Tue Oct 04, 2016 7:46 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2

Gunslinger9 wrote:

Hope this is helpful RS.



Hi Harry

most definitely helps mate, thank you for the reports look forward to seeing more.

any chance that we can see the report on the tau battle plz??

thank you again.

Author:  Gunslinger9 [ Tue Oct 04, 2016 8:25 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2


Sorry mate, that Tau battle is never going to see the light of day. We started late in the afternoon and I didn't take notes as I went because I thought we'd be short on time, which in the end we weren't. The pace of the game was frantic. I think we did four turns in about 2 hours!

I did write some notes on the red-eye flight home but then didn't look at them for a week. When I did they were absolute rubbish and if I published them everyone would be saying rules were broken or not applied properly, activation were missed, ect, which wasn't the case. Norto knows the rules (and Tau) very well and we had a very interested Fatdex looking over our shoulders (who seems to be able to quote rule verbatim and associated FAQ - he's very good!)

It was an immensely interesting game with 'shooty' Tau versus a 'shooty' Eldar army. But I just couldn't do it justice now. After four turns neither of us had any objectives and it was very narrowly Eldar on VP.

I have one more report from the weekend to finish tiding up (vs Legio Gryphonicus) and then I'll commit some time to some further comments in this thread.



Author:  Roboshadow [ Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2

Hi All,
Update has gone up on first page and is repeated below....
After everyone feedback and testing, have settle on the below changes…
Modify 4.2.1
• Bonesinger change to UK stats
• Change but also put 0–1 Void Spinner per EoV Warhost restriction. Too 0-1 VS per 2 EoV Warhost.
• Remove Guardian completely(Crewing the W/E’s)
• Remove war walkers from the list.
• Change that Aspect must be mounted or come through portal or use Vampire (Rule in Special rules).
• Remove weapons option for phantom
• Move Wraith Knight to Troupe Section
• Warlock have the Bonesinger upgrade option
• Remove phoenix bomber completely
• Removed the “(You may not have more Titan formations than Engine of Vaul Warhost formations)” in the Warhost section..

Author:  PFE200 [ Wed Nov 09, 2016 11:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2

Battle report up..


Author:  PFE200 [ Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:47 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2

Battle report up..


Author:  PFE200 [ Tue Dec 27, 2016 2:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2

Battle report...


Author:  wargame_insomniac [ Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2

Hi Roboshadow / Trent

I had a quick look at the Yme-Loc 4.2.1 pdf in the first post.
Am I right in thinking that Phantom Titans and 0-1 Warlock Titans can be still taken as a core Warhost?
I must have misunderstood but I had thought earlier in the thread it was discussed taking these out.

My concern is that this would take this list too close to Fir Iolarion List which I understood to be the Eldar Titan List.

Who is currently looking after the Craftworld Mymeara (Eldar Tank List)?
That has the Swords of Vaul (i.e. Falcons/Firestorms) included as core.

Moving away from NetEA lists for a second and glancing at the Epic UK Yme-Loc list, that has both Engines of Vaul and Swords of Vaul as the two core Warhost choices. That sounds good at face value.

It goes back to the earlier question of do we need a separate Eldar list to focus on each of Titans/War Engines/Tanks?
I like the idea of separate Eldar Titan list with weapon customability in the same way as for AMTL / OGBM.
But do we need a separate list for both Eldar War Machines and Tanks?

How about if we took out the Titans from the Net EA Yme-Loc list as core Warhost choices, moving the Titans back into the one third for Spacecraft & Aircraft, and we then added Swords of Vaul as core Warhost choices? This would have the added bonus of moving the Net EA Yme-Loc list closer to Epic UK Yme-Loc list. (I HATE the fact that we, as a niche segment of niche hobby, can't even agree on 1 set of lists but that is best saved for another thread discussion).



Author:  PFE200 [ Sun Jan 08, 2017 4:58 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2

HI James.

Thanks for your thoughts.

Currently in 4.2.1 you can still take Phantom Titans and 0-1 Warlock Titans as a core Warhost..

Currently the Craftworld Mymeara is been AC by me after taking over it from E&C and I’m hoping to getCraftworld Mymeara 4.2.2 up at some point....

The same was said about having Eldar titan list about 6+ months ago, do we really need it and yet we’re back on track in that, we have new Sub-ac and it’s moving along. I don’t see it been problem in having separate Titans/War Engines/Tanks or those been different build from the UK scene in some respects. The candidates that apply went W/E way, so dropped the SoV and move W/E’s around, when applying, since they believe it was more in line with fluff from 4th edition 40k…. So I guess for now the Yme-loc will be W/E heavy.. :)

Author:  wargame_insomniac [ Sun Jan 08, 2017 4:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2

Thanks Greg. It's just that have Titans in as core Warhosts in any list other than Eldar Titan list does nt feel right.
Reading the earlier posts in the thread, I could see that some of the early replies certainly came across very critical.
But I did agree with some of the points when they said that the list came across as simply wanting to take all the cool Eldar toys.

I would be intrerest in seeing Roboshadow's views on why he left the Eldar titans in.

My interest in both Yme-Loc and Mymeara lists is that I have a lot of Epic 40k era Eldar tanks and SHT's. And given that I initially want to concentrate on getting my IG and Orks finished, the quickest way for me to get a painted 3,000 points Eldar force on the table is by one or other of these two lists.

I guess it also depends on whether both Yme-Loc and Mymeara lists are intended to be purely Experimental or whther either/both are intended to be playtested and developed towards Approved status to join the big 5 Craftworld lists?



Author:  PFE200 [ Mon Jan 09, 2017 2:52 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2

HI James,

I believe 4.2.1 cover most of the concerns and the Titan thing will be the main point of discussion, I gather.

Both the Yme-Loc and Mymeara lists are intended to be playtested and developed towards Approved status to join the big 5 Craftworld lists....along with couple of others.. :)

Author:  Roboshadow [ Mon Jan 09, 2017 7:02 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2

Hi James

thanks for your thought's, sorry for the slow reply, work and applying for study have taken priority.

As already mention by PFE200 the fluff indicates that they were w/e and titan heavy, till you get 6/7th ed 40k, where they become tank heavy list by the looks....

So having standard titans as war host choice seems fine and i don't see it competing with the fir list.. since that has titan that have customizes weapons, and different support and by the looks will have a different playing styles/builds. so i have kept as a core choice, till i get some more testing in. i would like to see more battle reports to show the concern about the titan being a warhost choice, since testing in my group and Gunslinger9 shows no concerns about titans being a war host choice.

Author:  wargame_insomniac [ Mon Jan 09, 2017 9:24 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Yme-Loc Craftworld 4.2

Thanks Trent for the reply. I was reading up on the various minor Eldar Craftworlds last night and I can see where you got the background fluff for Yme-Loc.

I do still worry that will have too many Net EA Eldar lists. As well as the Big 5, plus Harlequin and Eldar Titan Clan, having both Yme-Loc and Mymeara as well would take us to 9 Eldar army lists. That is too much for even a major faction such as Eldar. Just my personal opinion.

I would prefer one list that had both Engines of Vaul and Swords of Vaul as core Warhost choices (and only these two choices). I do think having separate list for each is too much overlap and duplication. I think it would also help focus playtesting by keeping the emphasis on just one list. I would rather one list get Approved rather than two stuck in development limbo. And given the recent playtesting on Yme-Loc list, would nt it be easier to fold Mymeara list into Yme-Loc list?

In the meantime I wish both you an Greg good luck with these lists. And as you said, it will be good to see further battle reports to see how the list fares on the tabletop.



Page 3 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group