Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Results from the NDC Step 3 vote regarding Imperial Gu lists
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=33428
Page 1 of 4

Author:  mordoten [ Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Results from the NDC Step 3 vote regarding Imperial Gu lists

Steel Legion/Minervan Tank Legion:
Drop point on Bombards to 225 from current 250.
Change Hellhound upgrade to 1-3 Hellhounds for +25 points each

DKoK:
DKoK: Remove singelton warhounds from list.

Siege Masters:
Make Flak battery 150 points from current 100 points.
Bunkers become difficult terrain for WE:s with clarification that WE:s can't barge units out of bunkers.
Add no barging rule to trenches (se suggestion for bunkers).

Author:  Mard [ Thu Jun 21, 2018 5:01 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Results from the NDC Step 3 vote regarding Imperial Gu l

I was in this vote, but still need to voice my opinion of how much I hate two of these votes.
This hurts my DKOK and BSM armies :P

Author:  Markconz [ Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:20 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Results from the NDC Step 3 vote regarding Imperial Gu l

No Baneblade changes? :)

Author:  mordoten [ Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:49 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Results from the NDC Step 3 vote regarding Imperial Gu l

Nope, apparently we need another 18 pages of discussions and flowcharts before coming to a good sollution... :-P

Author:  Tiny-Tim [ Thu Jun 21, 2018 11:46 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Results from the NDC Step 3 vote regarding Imperial Gu l

The Imperial Guard AC is still working on changes to Baneblades.

Author:  RugII [ Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Results from the NDC Step 3 vote regarding Imperial Gu l

The Steel Legion update has been finalised for some time, I'm talking with EUK to see if we can achieve list parity before anything is announced.

I've still no idea what this NDC thing is about, who it is and on what they're voting; unless I'm instructed by the ERC I'm ignoring it in favour of continuing to engage with the wider community and maintaining transparency.

Author:  mordoten [ Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Results from the NDC Step 3 vote regarding Imperial Gu l

There is a thread on the forum explaining the whole idea very clearly if you look in the epic:armageddon section of this forum.

Looking forward to see what ideas you have settled on after all the work you guys have been doing!

Author:  Norto [ Sat Jun 30, 2018 1:13 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Results from the NDC Step 3 vote regarding Imperial Gu l

The proposals could at least be submitted to the ERC and left up them couldn't they?

Author:  StevekCole [ Thu Aug 09, 2018 2:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Results from the NDC Step 3 vote regarding Imperial Gu l

Can i check in as to whether the single warhound change has taken place for krieg? I'm completely behind this one (having won every game at the ETC last year with a single warhound on my opponent's blitz).

Author:  mordoten [ Thu Aug 09, 2018 8:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Results from the NDC Step 3 vote regarding Imperial Gu l

Won't happen since Rug refuses to use the work we did with the lists...

Author:  Norto [ Fri Aug 10, 2018 2:55 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Results from the NDC Step 3 vote regarding Imperial Gu l

Yeah its a shame really.

I honestly don't know whats going on in the imperial guard thread when i look at it. Has there been a role call for current army lists lately?

Author:  Mrdiealot [ Fri Aug 10, 2018 8:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Results from the NDC Step 3 vote regarding Imperial Gu l

The Imperial Guard lists are as is, and will apparently stay as is until something changes.

Author:  Armiger84 [ Sat Aug 11, 2018 2:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Results from the NDC Step 3 vote regarding Imperial Gu lists

Mrdiealot wrote:
The Imperial Guard lists are as is, and will apparently stay as is until something changes.


Edit: the passive-aggressive ragging on Rug got to me a little, prompting the pre-revision post. If you read back up 6 posts, Rug’s got a bunch of revisions he’s going to be rolling out, he’s just collaborating with the EUK folks before going live.

We all have day jobs, and we’re a gaming community, not a miniatures company (heck, I’m still collecting & priming models for playtesting the Skitarii Armor list I relaunched back in April!) There’s no expectation that a bunch of hobbyists are going to push out monthly or even quarterly game rules rebalances.

For that matter, some stability in established lists isn’t exactly a bad thing, especially the flexible ones. But then, I’m also not a big fan of changing stuff just for the sake of changing stuff ;)

Author:  GrimDarkBits [ Sat Aug 11, 2018 3:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Results from the NDC Step 3 vote regarding Imperial Gu l

Thank you, Armiger84. There's a certain irony in seeing Mordoten and others in the NDC complain that their work is being ignored. Earlier this year they didn't seem worried that their committee was ignoring work in progress Rug and others had done for months to update the list (easy gents, just giving you a hard time).

I think people do need to take a step back. The goal should be community engagement, not change for change's sake. The NDC did follow through and recommend a lot of changes. Some were interesting and some were absolute head scratchers. Rug made his response and now it's time for him to follow through on the changes he wants.

There's merit in the stability and coherency a single AC can provide to a list by curating it. We have to balance the desire to keep people engaged with the reality that this isn't anyone's day job.

Author:  Mrdiealot [ Sat Aug 11, 2018 8:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Results from the NDC Step 3 vote regarding Imperial Gu l

I'm not in favor of change for change's sake.

But when the Imperial Guard AC uses an obviously disingenuous argument ("I've still no idea what this NDC thing is about, who it is and on what they're voting") to wave aside both the process that led to the proposals and the results of it that's kind of annoys me.

Most of these changes are not exactly controversial, E-UK has done quite a few of them, and making fortifications slightly less absurd and a lot less exploitable when interacting with War Engines seems like a no-brainer to me.

Page 1 of 4 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/