Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 424 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 29  Next

Blood Angels List Development Thread

 Post subject: Re: Blood Angels List Development Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 11:58 am 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2011 12:03 pm
Posts: 6302
Location: Leicester UK
I'm gonna have a crack at the following list over the summer..... hyper aggressive, air-assault, suits my playstyle and I reckon would be fun to try!

DEATH COMPANY [450]
Chaplain, 4 Assault Death Company Units, 2 Furioso Dreadnought

SPACECRAFT [200]
Strike Cruiser

STORMRAVEN [300]
4 Stormraven Gunships

TERMINATOR DETACHMENT [450]
4 Terminators, Supreme Commander

ASSAULT DETACHMENT [375]
6 Assault Units, 2 Assault Units, Chaplain

DEVASTATOR DETACHMENT [250]
4 Devastators, Drop Pods

THUNDERHAWK [200]

THUNDERHAWK [200]

THUNDERHAWK [200]

THUNDERHAWK [200]

THUNDERBOLT FIGHTERS [175]
2 Thunderbolts

will see how I get on with very limited AT, and yes I know I have two BTS formations.... I'll tweak it a bit ;)

_________________
NetEA Space Marine, Imperial Fists and Blood Angels Army Champion

NetEA Red Corsairs Army Champion

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Blood Angels List Development Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 1:51 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 8:46 pm
Posts: 200
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Personally I prefer the addition of the previously missing elements at the expense of no titans.

That said what is stopping you from creating a new formation like Vanguard Vets? A Jumppack unit with teleport (game fluff has them being experts in their use) of maybe 4 stands? It's a unit that could see cross population across SM lists or be relegated to those armies that excel in jump assaults (RG and BA). Just a thought.

_________________
Current EA Armies:
Steel Legion (6k+)
Orks (6k+)
Iron Warriors (Currently Building)
Daemons

My Commission Website: http://hulksmashstudios.webs.com
My Languishing Blog that will soon host some Epic stuff: http://hulksmash-homeplace.blogspot.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Blood Angels List Development Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 2:25 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2011 12:03 pm
Posts: 6302
Location: Leicester UK
the addition of vanguard vets has been discussed at length.... and I think the upshot is that they are abstracted into regular assault marines etc.... BA already have sanguinary guard and death company as well as the other marine choices, I think adding yet more different flavours of marine would just end up with a bit of a mess really :)

_________________
NetEA Space Marine, Imperial Fists and Blood Angels Army Champion

NetEA Red Corsairs Army Champion

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Blood Angels List Development Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 5:57 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 8:46 pm
Posts: 200
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Well Salamanders for example have Salamander Tacticals, Salamander Devastators, Salamander Terminators, Salamander Attack Bikes (I think) that are exclusive to the list with several units restricted to specific lists like the helios, redeemer, and prometheus.

BA's have Sanguinairy Guard, Death Company, and Baal Predators w/Storm Ravens and variant dreadnoughts being available to various armies. That's 2 Variant Marines to 3 in an already approved list. I don't see how adding Vanguard to BA's and hopefully Ravenguard would be an issue. "They've already got stuff" isn't a great reason to me. I just don't see why they couldn't be the type of unit that's added to armies that specialize in jump pack assaults like BA & RG.

Just throwing out thoughts.

_________________
Current EA Armies:
Steel Legion (6k+)
Orks (6k+)
Iron Warriors (Currently Building)
Daemons

My Commission Website: http://hulksmashstudios.webs.com
My Languishing Blog that will soon host some Epic stuff: http://hulksmash-homeplace.blogspot.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Blood Angels List Development Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 6:13 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 8915
Location: Manalapan, FL
Hulksmash wrote:
Well Salamanders for example have Salamander Tacticals, Salamander Devastators, Salamander Terminators, Salamander Attack Bikes (I think) that are exclusive to the list with several units restricted to specific lists like the helios, redeemer, and prometheus.


Hulksmash, those are REGULAR Tactical, Devestator, Termis, Attack Bike, et.al. but with alternate weapons. It's a defacto naming standard when you create a variant of a standard unit to tweak it with the list name included so it is immediately apparent that the weapons are differing from Codex Tactical or Assault or whatever.

For instance, in the Iron Hands styled list, Terminators come with a Single Assault Cannon and a Single Heavy Flamer vs TWO Assault Cannons to represent the Iron Hands pathological need to be generalists. Therefore they are called Iron Hands Terminators (or would be if the IH didn't actually call their elite Morlocks ;D )

Vanguard or Sternguard veterans are a NEW and DIFFERENT unit cut from whole cloth and really in an epic game scale would be the other 4 guys on the stand with the Space Marine commander.

Nothing stops anyone from creating a new list with those as specific options but shoehorning them in the Codex list doesn't add anything significant enough that reevaluating the ENTIRE approved set of lists is worth it, mate.

Hulksmash wrote:
BA's have Sanguinairy Guard, Death Company, and Baal Predators w/Storm Ravens and variant dreadnoughts being available to various armies. That's 2 Variant Marines to 3 in an already approved list.

The SG and DC are not a variant of standard marines in the same way the Salamander Tactical is. It a completely new and unique unit, again, cut from whole cloth. I personally think the SG are too close to be worth it but the other sub-ACs and the community in general voted for them, so there you go. Baal Predators and Storm Ravens are THE iconic BA armor and flyer weapon system.

Now that being said, a large reason they've not really been tackled is that unfortunately D6 just doesn't give you the precision needed to work them out. I mean, what do they get Armor 3+ instead? Well that's jsut as good as Terminators! Do they get FF 3+/CC2+ (Sternguard/Vanguard respectively) instead? Well that's just running straight into just being devestators by another name or again, an insanely better CC unit. There's just little flexibility to really model them out.

Also do not take any of this as personal criticism. It's just we've had this exact conversation so many times in Marine development land that it could sound like bitchiness. :) We're just like, "Oh it must have been 6 months past today, we're having the Stern/Vanguard discussion...again...for the 300th time..." ;D

NOW in the risk of derailing the thread (sorry XM, I owe you a beer next time I'm down) but hopefully ending this tangential topic:
To model a Sternguard/Vanguard unit I'd suggest that a Devestator/Assault unit can be granted the ability to automatically drop 1 or 2 extra BMs when they rally to represent their increased martial skill. Cost it +25 or +50 points and call it good. Or give them an EA(+1) to reprent their better skillz and / or specialist ammunition and weapons.

Before XM swings the Ban-Hammer at me, let keep focused on the thread topic.

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Blood Angels List Development Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 7:09 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 8915
Location: Manalapan, FL
Now onto the actual BA development topics=>

A few random points, notes, rebuttals, or devil's advocate thoughts ;)
Angel_of_Caliban wrote:
Blood Angel Assault Marines get Teleport?!?!?

I feel this is much more suited for Raven Guard IF ever add or it SHOULD be open to ALL lists. BA don't have awesome jumppack skills like RG last time I checked.

Actually I would state that the RG probably SHOULD have that ability (and their fun reroll to represent their insane Jump ability above and beyond others). However the BA codex in 5th edition was 100% about a force that could perform Deep Strike on just about ANY unit. Shit, they are (or at least were) the only army able to Deep Strike a Land Raider in 40k! :D This is where the crazy idea had a large part of its genesis from.

Xenocial Maniac wrote:
It could be that teleporting ASM is not the answer to the list's problems. It honestly didn't help much in the last two games I used them in. That, coupled with all of the resistance to the idea makes me think that it is possible that I am not moving in the right direction with this.
...
Therefore, if I am going to concede that there is no fluff justification for teleporting assault marines, then I need the concession that there is no fluff justification for the absence of predator annihilators, vindicators, and land raider formations in return. Nowhere is it stated that the Blood Angels have any less access to those tools than other marine chapters. I am assuming that their exclusion from the list was an attempt at making the list thematic and geared towards assault, just as my inclusion of teleporting ASM was.


I agree and this is probably true on several axis.
1. Fluff debates notwithstanding, the fact is that CC units are nitch at best in the EA rules. We're actually trying to solve a totally different problem than assault marines themselves so this is probably not going to give high ROI. We're doing a band-aid.
2. A radical re-envisioning of the list is great and all but the fact is, it's taking this back to square 1 Experimental status and the stated goal isn't a reworked list. It is an approved list.
3. I agree that there's some interesting possibilities that can be explored with teleporter assault marines and that we probably can get it to work, and work well, it is going to take a huge amount of effort.
4. Nothing stops additional variants of a variant list. For instance we've got two different approaches for the Raptors and two different ones on the Night Lords. THAT'S OK. Just because we have another list doesn't mean its the main focus. Basically, we can get the BA list approved with the current direction and for fun, try out some fan-lists that perform a Shock-and-Awe Assault list and see if anything sticks. It's a big universe out there after all.

Ginger's post is too long to pick out specific things/points but let me just state that it has some very interesting ideas that we all should think about and not dismiss/ignore.

So my take would be to run with the basic premise of the existing list and make some small adjustments:

-I agree there's no reason to lack Predator Annihilators in this list as a specific formation.
-I thought vindicators were already in. If not, they should be. It's a standard part of the marine toolkit. Something fun would be to drop the dozer (aka walker) and give the lucifer engine to them (aka speed boost). Very BA like :D
-There's no reason for Baal predators to be priced different to Predator Destructors. They're really a replacement for them. In addition they should have FF3+. I'm sure this is a typo.
-I'm personally not sold on the SG but they seem to be a fan favorite so why not. I've got the damn models so this will make me actually paint the little Cads. They need LOTS of focused testing, however.
-I'm good with the TBrick Transporters. The only reason they're not in the Codex list was FW didn't have a model at that time and JJ didn't have the funds to create one (not even sure it had been worked out in any models period back then).
-Furioso dread at 50 points. It's a CC optimized dread. It's pure mishigas to think that's worth +25 points.
-Land Raiders as independent formation. Allow Redeemers and Phobos patterns. Call it good.

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Blood Angels List Development Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 7:33 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 9:53 pm
Posts: 374
jimmyzimms wrote:
Now onto the actual BA development topics=>


A radical re-envisioning of the list is great and all but the fact is, it's taking this back to square 1 Experimental status and the stated goal isn't a reworked list. It is an approved list.


So my take would be to run with the basic premise of the existing list and make some small adjustments:

-I agree there's no reason to lack Predator Annihilators in this list as a specific formation.
-I thought vindicators were already in. If not, they should be. It's a standard part of the marine toolkit. Something fun would be to drop the dozer (aka walker) and give the lucifer engine to them (aka speed boost). Very BA like :D
-There's no reason for Baal predators to be priced different to Predator Destructors. They're really a replacement for them. In addition they should have FF3+. I'm sure this is a typo.
-I'm personally not sold on the SG but they seem to be a fan favorite so why not. I've got the damn models so this will make me actually paint the little Cads. They need LOTS of focused testing, however.
-I'm good with the TBrick Transporters. The only reason they're not in the Codex list was FW didn't have a model at that time and JJ didn't have the funds to create one (not even sure it had been worked out in any models period back then).
-Furioso dread at 50 points. It's a CC optimized dread. It's pure mishigas to think that's worth +25 points.
-Land Raiders as independent formation. Allow Redeemers and Phobos patterns. Call it good.


About the Experimental vs Approved thing you're right, that might be a problem! A radical change (like the teleport for ASM) can easily mean that.. Not too happy with the teleport, as a solution, but I think this is the best one, I wonder why it wasn't tested before.. :) Good point to XM in this! The Raven Guard belongs to another SubAC, so it's not our problem (RG can be better in teleport actions, with the rerolls for example)!

Totally agree about the Furioso, Baal Predator, Land Raider stuff. Totally. :) If you like, you can allow only Redeemers to be a stand alone formation, and keep normal (AT) LR's to be only an upgrade! Redeemers are not that best, so in this way, they will have a chance to appear on the battlefield.. Something like LR upgrade for normal Predators, or Termies, upgrade Redeemers for Baal's, etc..

I really like to see a special, DC Dreadnought with fearless, but it's not a big thing, I can live without it! Things, like why a frenzying BA unit doesn't have infiltrate or something is a different story..

The Vindicators should keep the walker ability, they are normal Vindicators, with special engines, professional crew -> not every BA is totally insane, they will not rush out from their vehicle to get a into good CC ;) And I like the dozer blades in my minis, sorry :D

I don't like SG, they are too expensive for a glasshammer unit, it's already too easy to loose a BTS -> SG is vulnerable to MW artillyery, Orbital Bombardement, etc.. (altough i saw some truly beautiful forumware ones somewhere ;) ), so I'm neutral in this question, I think I will never use them, but If everyone else likes them, so why not.. The same for THT's, instead of taking 3 of them, I will take a Landing Craft, but it's my opinion! It's again something like adding too much new units, will change the core list -> road to an Experimental list..

BTW what's up with the Stormravens? 2 or 4 rockets?

A good point is to make only minor changes on the developmental list, starting with the existing units cost balance, to see how a cheaper BA army works.. Then go on with deep sitrikes :D


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Blood Angels List Development Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 9:01 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 8:46 pm
Posts: 200
Location: Minneapolis, MN
@jimmyzimms

It did come off as bitchy but I understand :) But I would recommend just linking the thread it's been discussed in as people don't always see every thread and are generally responding to what is in that thread.

As for the Vanguard I think my comment about spreading to other lists was taken a bit seriously. I think mostly it is an excuse to add the teleport assault unit while keeping the majority of the list 100% intact. This would allow the work that already existed with the larger formations and such to stay the same. And it makes sense fluffwise that BA's would have it. I at most saw it as a unit that would be list restricted similar to all the various landraiders who appear in some lists but not others. Note I didn't say anything about sternguard since they don't work at the macro level. The only reason for the Vanguard was fluff naming for a unit that was being discussed.

That said I'll leave it alone as it obviously struck a nerve :)

My preference regarding the stormraven would be that it goes to 2 rockets and stays cheaper if you are adding back in the pred. annihilator and standard lr's. In that case cheaper is better as you won't need the AT as much.

_________________
Current EA Armies:
Steel Legion (6k+)
Orks (6k+)
Iron Warriors (Currently Building)
Daemons

My Commission Website: http://hulksmashstudios.webs.com
My Languishing Blog that will soon host some Epic stuff: http://hulksmash-homeplace.blogspot.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Blood Angels List Development Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 9:11 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 8915
Location: Manalapan, FL
No worries Hulksmash. The internets lacks nuance so just wanted to make sure things were not taken wrong. Cheers!

Pati wrote:
DC Dreadnought with fearless, but it's not a big thing

That's actually been corrected already. Dreads taken in the DC become DC Dreads with frenzied/Fearless. >:D

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Blood Angels List Development Thread
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 9:25 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 9:53 pm
Posts: 374
jimmyzimms wrote:
No worries Hulksmash. The internets lacks nuance so just wanted to make sure things were not taken wrong. Cheers!

Pati wrote:
DC Dreadnought with fearless, but it's not a big thing

That's actually been corrected already. Dreads taken in the DC become DC Dreads with frenzied/Fearless. >:D


Hell YEAH :D one goal reached :D


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Blood Angels List Development Thread
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 5:38 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 6:59 pm
Posts: 573
Location: Los Angeles
Whew!

Alright, there is a lot to process, digest, and ponder here. I'm going to try to be as succinct and organized as possible in addressing all of the pertinent points. Whew. Where to begin? In order, I suppose.

As far as reorganizing the structure of the list, it's a great idea, and something that I gave serious consideration to when I took on the job of BA AC, actually. At the moment, however, I think it's best not to alter the list org too seriously. As I've shared with Jimmy in off-line conversations, above all, my priority is to have an approved list for this iconic Space Marine chapter as soon as possible. Rearranging core formations, etc, will set the schedule back too far.

I've listened to you guys, playtested it, and agree that teleporting ASM is not the way to go at this point. It also sets the approval schedule back too far. I think that there is never harm in giving something a go. If it doesn't work, you go back to the drawing board and try again. It was an experiment, and, I agree that it really is just a band aid over the main issue that CC is not so effective in the Epic rule set.

I think that having a "standard" BA list that functions similarly to codex astartes is the way to go, and if we want to get funky with organization and teleporting assault marines and all that, we can create a themed list for them - "Blood Angel 3rd War For Armageddon" list or similar.

To address concerns that the list as-is has not been playtested enough, particularly with Thunderhawk and drop heavy armies - I actually have run the list that way. Unfortunately, I can't batrep every game I play. Such lists perform as well as you would expect an Astartes list to run without access to Warhounds and anti-tank weaponry. Without any fire support, you're flying your Thunderhawks through AA fire, picking up blast markers on the way in, going into assault down 2 combat res, 3 or even 4 if you are outnumbered, and rolling 8 or 9 dice against a tough unit such as a Titan or Leman Russ Tank Company that is going to save against most of your hits and then hit you back as well (which you will then save at a lesser rate, if at all). The harsh "break or be broken" nature of assaults in this game is very unforgiving, particularly when you enter such contests at a disadvantage. Even when you do win such engagements, casualties are generally so high that the "victorious" unit is broken or useless for capturing or contesting objectives for long.

When your only option for destroying such tough units is assault, you can see how this would be hit-or-miss.

In short, I feel that I've playtested this enough and hope you will trust me to move forward with the changes that I feel need to be made.

Apologies for being long-winded. I am trying to be thorough in communicating my reasoning behind all of this.

Ok, so here are the changes I am thinking of for now -

- Yes, Pati, Furiosos are 50 points, and they are fearless when they join the DC (this change was made under Dobbsy, in fact)

- Storm Raven is 50 points with two missiles

- Baals get FF 3+ and are 275

- Predator Annihilator formations are 275

- Do Land Raiders get their own formations? Now that I think of it, in the 40k codex, Blood Angels only have access to Land Raiders as transports, and not as independent Heavy Support. Will have to give this some thought.

- Bikes are 200 points, in line with the Astartes cost

- Do we include vindicator formations? If so, priced at 250. Concerned that this addition might be changing too much, too soon.

- Sanguinary Guard. What do we do with this? 375 + 100 for this unit is too high. No one will ever use it. I wouldn't. I want to start from scratch with this unit. I'm thinking priced the same as terminators is more appropriate for this unit, so 350 to start. Not necessarily sold on the necessity of joining the SC to it. Thinking that if you field the SG, it's auto-BTS regardless of points. Or, that if you do choose to field an SC in your list, it must be attached to the SG. But I'm inclined to think that making the SC a mandatory addition to the Sanguinary Guard makes it so expensive as to be unplayable. Or, if the SC is to be mandatory, another option is to price it at 400, inclusive of the SC. Open to ideas, here. Just keep in mind that having the SC attached to such a squishy squad, or making the formation auto-BTS is a hefty liability that is probably worthy of a point discount.

The reason for the higher points cost for Blood Angel predators and vindicators is their increased speed. I feel that there should a premium cost for that.

Ok. I am off to make the changes to the predator annihilator formation, the Baals, the Storm Ravens, and the Bikes immediately. Will post the file shortly.

To summarize - Up for discussion -

Land Raider Formations - yay or nay?

Sanguinary Guard - what do we do?

Vindicator Formations - yay or nay?

EDIT: Latest draft now attached to first post.

_________________
Former Blood Angels Army Champion
Epic Gamers Los Angeles Chapter
Armies Played:
Blood Angels
Black Legion
Codex Marines
Imperial Fists


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Blood Angels List Development Thread
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 6:47 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 9:35 am
Posts: 3322
Location: Norrköping, Sweden.
Land raiders yay, make SG cheaper so they eill be used, vindicators yay.

I don't play BA and never will so this might not be an interesting opinion...

_________________
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: Blood Angels List Development Thread
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:16 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 12:54 am
Posts: 1927
Location: Australia
Mate,

As per my post, yay Land Raider, yay Vindicator and as above make the SG a viable choice for players.

Cheers
Aaron


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Blood Angels List Development Thread
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 9:44 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 9:53 pm
Posts: 374
Vindicators -just for upgrade, to keep the more themed BA units (like Baal's) to be on the focus!
Land Raiders -stand alone formation for Redeemers only? Is there any fluff that suggests this?
SG -have no idea, I supported the light-terminator idea previously..


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Blood Angels List Development Thread
PostPosted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 10:16 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5467
Location: London, UK
@XM, to your points

  • Furioso - Good decision
  • Cheaper Storm Raven - Good Decision. Is this an upgrade only, or also a separate formation? (I am *much* less certain of the wisdom of a separate formation)
  • Baals - Good Decision to keep them the same cost as standard Predators
  • Land Raiders - include them as an Upgrade, not a separate formation (this will reflect their relative rarity)
  • Vindicators - Again, yes as an Upgrade, I would be a little more cautious of the formation. Perhaps this decision could be taken once the rest of the list settles down.
  • Sanguinary Guard - 'I hear the pain' as they say. The dilemma (as you present it) is balancing cost and power of this formation - why take this formation at 375 (or even 350), when Termies will *always* outperform it.
      Here are some alternative thoughts, based around reducing the cost to ~60 per unit, providing extra upgrades to offset these reductions:-
    • Remove the MW from the EA to distinguish them from Termies.
    • Remove the Jump pack, but provide it as an upgrade
    • Provide other transport options as an alternative to Jump pack
    • Provide the Vindi and Hunter as an upgrade
    • Consider adding extra SG as an upgrade at 100 for two
    The thinking behind this is that as the 'Elite of the elite', they would have their pick of all the BA goodies. This would allow them to choose the loadout for their mission. In our terms, this allows the player to increase the formation size and resilience at a more appropriate cost.

  • On the predator and Vindi speed, I think I would be OK with keeping them slightly faster than the 'standard' model for the same cost. The reasoning being that the list needs this slight boost - though obviously this would need wider acceptance.

Final thoughts are still to consider finding a way to separate the list into two sections. You have already tested and found that the BA cannot actually function as a purely assault based army - so why not keep the "Death-or-Glory" theme in an 'Airborne Assault' section. This would allow you slightly more freedom in providing the standard Marine AV assets in the ground-pounding 'support' section.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 424 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 29  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:  

cron

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