Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 83 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Thurgrim's Stronghold comments

 Post subject: Thurgrim's Stronghold comments
PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 6:21 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2595
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Just a few quick questions from my first read through and test list with the Thurgrim's Stronghold Squat list

Thunderers FF seems low. Should be 3+ perhaps?

Thunders should come in upgrades of 4 for 200. 3 is an odd number and leaves you with unused transport spots

Do Robots not have a transport option? Why can't Moles or a Leviathan carry them?

Goliath range seems low. At least 120cm seems more in fitting with the background.

Missiles on the Colossus and Cyclops should have multiple rounds no?

I have a test list that I am going to try out this weekend or next in a game

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Thurgrim's Stronghold comments
PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 4:11 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:38 am
Posts: 303
Location: Utah, Texas, or some Pacific Island
Thunderers FF seems low. Should be 3+ perhaps?


As the back ground in the list states unlike other armies heavy weapons the Thunderers all carry heavy weapons there are no small arms in the unit. We felt the trade off here would be a ranged rate of fire of three but a little less effective in FF assault. But as always we are open to discuss it ( In fact opening up the discussion on Thurgrimm's again is great as the only real playtesting has been the local group and I admit there is bias there,and tough always keep in check)

Thunders should come in upgrades of 4 for 200. 3 is an odd number and leaves you with unused transport spots

You don't have to get three you can get just two for 100pts. To be honest it was intentional to create just the issue you have brought up. Either you buy two for an even transport number, or get three and have an unused slot. When it was done players fielded three in 'walking' Brotherhoods, two in 'Mobile' Brotherhoods, and got one to even out the Thunderer Battery for transport.

Do Robots not have a transport option? Why can't Moles or a Leviathan carry them?

At this time No and this is funny. Nobody has ever asked about it before, we never even considered it, and it never dawned on me as their intended purpose is a scout screen :vo  (Boy do I feel dumb). In more games then I can count I have seen Robots used and they are always up front in a skirmish line, or deployed scattered to prevent deep strikes. For now consider them taking up two normal slots in all Transports.

Goliath range seems low. At least 120cm seems more in fitting with the background.

For fluff purposes you are correct and it probably should be in the range of 150cms to 250cms going by the SM/TL game. However no matter how we tried it with the longer ranges it dominated unless we made the costs real high.(In fact I still think they are too cheap but the local group still feels I am incorrect and will not budge on it.) The intent was then to create a powerful IDF weapon, which it is, that has to be well protected. The shorter range makes it less dominating as it must operate nearer the enemy, and the minimum range forces the Squat player to keep the enemy from getting close to them. For my two cents it is the weapon in the list I most want to change but here locally I am alone  with this argument. More input from the outside world could help move them off their stand.

Missiles on the Colossus and Cyclops should have multiple rounds no?

To avoid record keeping they are not one shot weapons but can be fired every turn, however they cannot be used for IDF fire. My feelings were to make them one shot weapons 4xBPMW, as per SM/TL. But with multiple WEs ranging the battlefield it became difficult to keep track of who fired and how many times, etc (As multiple shots were tried to). Unlike a Deathstrike they aren't removed after shooting, it became a real pain. So we compromised on a lower BPMW fire every turn.

Thanks PG and glad to see your still with us................

Jaldon :p

_________________
I know a dead parrot when I see one and I'm looking at one right now.
Tyranid AC


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Thurgrim's Stronghold comments
PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 5:42 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2595
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Quote: (jaldon454 @ 05 Jul. 2008, 08:11 )

As the back ground in the list states unlike other armies heavy weapons the Thunderers all carry heavy weapons there are no small arms in the unit. We felt the trade off here would be a ranged rate of fire of three but a little less effective in FF assault.

A five man stand with three ACs would still have two Squats with Lasguns. It just doesn't seem that much of an increase, in terms of FF values, from the other units which have a lot fewer heavy weapons.

To be honest it was intentional to create just the issue you have brought up.


I'd rather be able to fill something like a Leviathan and not "waste" transport spots though. You can't buy two stands of anything else to fill those additional spaces.

For now consider them taking up two normal slots in all Transports.

Will do. I want to have them coming out of a Leviathan with some Beserkers. :-)

To avoid record keeping they are not one shot weapons but can be fired every turn, however they cannot be used for IDF fire.

Makes sense

Thanks

BTW, are the Thudd Guns and Mole Mortars meant to be Mounted or is that a typo?

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Thurgrim's Stronghold comments
PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 9:09 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:38 am
Posts: 303
Location: Utah, Texas, or some Pacific Island
BTW, are the Thudd Guns and Mole Mortars meant to be Mounted or is that a typo?


It is not a typo they are supposed to be mounted

Jaldon :p

_________________
I know a dead parrot when I see one and I'm looking at one right now.
Tyranid AC


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Thurgrim's Stronghold comments
PostPosted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 9:15 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2595
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Quote: (jaldon454 @ 05 Jul. 2008, 13:09 )

It is not a typo they are supposed to be mounted

How does that work?

As well, that doesn't sync with the existing Thudd Gun stats

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Thurgrim's Stronghold comments
PostPosted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 12:29 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:38 am
Posts: 303
Location: Utah, Texas, or some Pacific Island
I would very much like to re-work the list, but I want to do it outside my local group as it is difficult to get beyond some of their biases concerning the list.

This would be one of those issues as they feel it should be a built in weakness 'mounted' thus keeping the guns out of woods, when it creates more rules problems then anything else.

In another day or two I am hoping to get started on a re-work of Thurgrimm's and the Demiurg for the forum, sorta of a suggestion list of idea changes.

In my opinion it looked good a long time ago but time has shown it to have some problems, however I still disagree that it is overpowered.

Jaldon :p

_________________
I know a dead parrot when I see one and I'm looking at one right now.
Tyranid AC


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Thurgrim's Stronghold comments
PostPosted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 5:37 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 4:16 pm
Posts: 364
Location: Manchester, England
I think Thugrim's needs a lot of work before it starts being gamable.

Here's my initial problems:

1.  Too many characters

There's an Ancestor Lord, Warlord, Lord, and Guildmaster.  I'd cut out the Lord entirely.  It brings it in line with the number of characters in other lists, and he doesn't fulfill a different role really to the Warlord.


2.  Tunnellers

Why do Moles and Termites have weapon systems?  They were never in the game, and aren't on the models.  Drop the weapons.  Why the need to change their rules from Drop Pods?


3.  Ironhawks

What on Earth are they there for?  Their rules are vague ("can spot"?!), they cause a lot of in-game complications and don't add anything to the feel.  Why drop the Battle Cannon?  Drop them entirely.


4.  No Rhinos

Where are all the Rhinos?  Squats used to have Rhinos.  


5.  What's this Spartan nonsense?

I'm against adding new units and background.  Why were Spartans introduced?


6.  Thudd Guns

Why aren't these brough in line with the Siege Masters one, but with maybe a better armour stat?


7.  Robots

Seriously, what's going on here?  Scout?  If they're infantry, why are they also walkers?  Make them light or armoured vehicles, drop the scout.


8.  Hearthguard

They're jsut copies of Terminators.  Squat Hearthguard never had access to heavy weaponary in 2nd edition 40K.  The models don't have it either.  They acted as combat squad leaders, or bodyguards.  Not Terminator equivalents.  Drop the Assault Cannons.


9.  Superheavies - far too good

These are ridiculously overpowered.  How many weapons on the Colossus?  And aren't they meant to have Void Shields?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Thurgrim's Stronghold comments
PostPosted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 1:38 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:38 am
Posts: 303
Location: Utah, Texas, or some Pacific Island
I think Thugrim's needs a lot of work before it starts being gamable.


Have you even used it?

There's an Ancestor Lord, Warlord, Lord, and Guildmaster.  I'd cut out the Lord entirely.  It brings it in line with the number of characters in other lists, and he doesn't fulfill a different role really to the Warlord.

First the Lord is not a character it is part of a Warrior Brotherhood as a unit (And also only available to that formations).

The Guild Master is only available to the Bikers Guild and represents part of the original background from SM/TL.

The Warlord is an upgrade to the Warrior Brotherhood only, and represents a higher status Squat commanding the Brotherhood, again as per SM/TL

The SM have four characters, the Squats have three, two if you accept the fact that the Warlord is actually an upgrade for the Lord unit.

2.  Tunnellers

Why do Moles and Termites have weapon systems?  They were never in the game, and aren't on the models.  Drop the weapons.  Why the need to change their rules from Drop Pods?

The Tunneler Rules are the same as those given in the Epic-A rule book for tunnelers, we didn't change anything Jervis wrote them.

A majority of players wanted the Tunneler Machines to remain on the table surface and have some effect on the game. Their weapons are almost entirely defensive in nature and actually slow down the formations they are part of. No one in a couple of years of using the list has found this to be a problem.

3.  Ironhawks

What on Earth are they there for?  Their rules are vague ("can spot"?!), they cause a lot of in-game complications and don't add anything to the feel.  Why drop the Battle Cannon?  Drop them entirely.

Again, as per SM/TL, the Colossus uses a Gyrocopter to spot for it. GW never explained where the fancy gear for this work was housed in the Gyro so we decided to remove the BC and put the fancy equipment there. Again in years of using the list now the rules for it spotting haven't been a problem with anyone before. It couldn't be easier, if the Iron Hawk can see the target the Colossus D'Day cannon/missiles can shoot at it.

4.  No Rhinos

Where are all the Rhinos?  Squats used to have Rhinos.  


5.  What's this Spartan nonsense?

I'm against adding new units and background.  Why were Spartans introduced?

You have a very unkind way of asking a very simple question. So far you have ignored much of the background as given for the Squats in SM/TL, yet you find this offensive? We did use Rhinos, and Landraiders at first, they were both available to Squats in the SM/TL rules. The majority decided to break away from the Imperial STCs deciding the Squats would put their own touches on the equipment rather then follow the Imperial standard.

The model used for the Spartan IS the Rhino, it just has a different name and a better AP weapon system.

A later list, now not in use anymore Khazak's I think, used a version of the Landraider, and we changed its name also.

6.  Thudd Guns

Why aren't these brough in line with the Siege Masters one, but with maybe a better armour stat?

Because the Siege Masters version is the Imperial standard and the Squat version is not. Again we did not want to follow exactly with the Imperium as Squats ARE different.

7.  Robots

Seriously, what's going on here?  Scout?  If they're infantry, why are they also walkers?  Make them light or armoured vehicles, drop the scout.

One, we are not going to drop scout, it is the only scouts the Squats have and as the background states, here and in SM/TL, they perform the dangerous missions no Squat leader would a Squat to go do. Can you think of anything more dangerous then a sacrificial Scout?

Two the list posted is the stripped down version used for playtesting over two years ago, not the finished product which came soon after, so some typos are all over the place in it. It was put up here so those interested parties could get started in helping with the Demiurg/Squat development thread. The finished product was much better, and the typos were fixed, but also took up a large amount of space. This one is much easier to copy.

Third, the walker was a typo from when they were LV.

9.  Superheavies - far too good

These are ridiculously overpowered.  How many weapons on the Colossus?  And aren't they meant to have Void Shields?

I have heard this so many times from people who have only read the list, and never used it. Read the batrep given in the batrep section, the Cyclops their did hardly anything. In using them for a long time they have not been found to be overpowered. Deadly if one is not careful, but hardly overpowered.

As for too many weapons................

Colossus SM/TL stats
8xBattlecannons
Doomsday Cannon
Thunderer
6xMissiles
16xBolters

Jervis killed the Void shields on these vehicles when he decided the Leviathin was too small to have them. The Squat/Demiurg list would have no chance of anykind of approval if we added them to the Squat list.

8.  Hearthguard

They're jsut copies of Terminators.  Squat Hearthguard never had access to heavy weaponary in 2nd edition 40K.  The models don't have it either.  They acted as combat squad leaders, or bodyguards.  Not Terminator equivalents.  Drop the Assault Cannons.

One, the Lord Unit (Not Character), is a Hearthguard unit, the unarmored ones. (They are that way in the old SM/TL game)

Two, a majority of players wanted the Armored Hearthguard in this version to be more in line with the old 40k background, better weapons layout, we decided on Assault Cannons

Three, they cannot teleport, termies can.

Four, they don't have TRA, termies do.

Five, they are not termies.

Six, players wanted to be able to field them as a bodyguard formation, we decided to allow it.

Last, the work being down to merge Squat/Demiurg is going to result in changes. We can address those changes if people give us positive input with proposed ideas, simple ridicule and complaint is not helpful.

Jaldon :p

_________________
I know a dead parrot when I see one and I'm looking at one right now.
Tyranid AC


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Thurgrim's Stronghold comments
PostPosted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 11:31 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 12:28 pm
Posts: 362
Curis,

Many times, my fellow TacCom members have found my posts to be abrupt or curt, even when I was well-intended  :whistle:

I hope that your comments above were meant as beneficial, constructive criticism, but they do come across as unfounded.

Simple question: Have you played the Squats (or Demiurg) in Epic:Armageddon?

If so, as Jaldon mentioned, please relay your experieces in a batrep. If not, then please try to "break" the list and provide that experience in a batrep.

Both Jaldon and I are glad to see re-newed interest in making the models viable for the community, but we have been very direct about what would be most helpful at present: Playtesting

_________________
Squat/Demiurg Army Co-Champion (in cahoots with Jaldon)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Thurgrim's Stronghold comments
PostPosted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 11:54 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 8:41 pm
Posts: 1480
Location: Gothenburg,Sweden
The problem with that asked for playtesting is that if the look of the list is dead wrong in ones eyes, then it's hard to summon the energi to playtest it.

Ie if I don't like it, why then help out with it?
And personally I much prefer the Golgothan list.
The aT demiurgs are worth considering to, but that's not the main one.

That's part of why atleast I am not very active in this. I got my squats, a good bunch of them. But nowhere to dance.

_________________
It would be nice to get lightspeed,
so far we can only reach slight speed.
- Erik M
092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Thurgrim's Stronghold comments
PostPosted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 1:24 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 12:28 pm
Posts: 362
Erik M,

At that point I can only hope that your interest in the miniatures will win out over your dislike of the current lists.

We would like to take everyone's "wants" and incorporate them, but without some quantitative information it is difficult to do anything other than accept that you don't like the lists...

_________________
Squat/Demiurg Army Co-Champion (in cahoots with Jaldon)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Thurgrim's Stronghold comments
PostPosted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:02 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 4:16 pm
Posts: 364
Location: Manchester, England
I've used Thurgrim's list.  Repeatedly.  Against a variety of armies and opponents.  If you want a very analytical scientific approach where I have to pick it apart then so be it.  I shall arrange an evening where I can chronicle the every niggle.  The tone of my comments is intentional to show how off I think the list is.

It's not really helped when you're posting out-of-date material.  Why not post up the corrected version of the list?

Thanks for providing some insight into the decisions and why they were made.  I think some designers' notes are helpful, rather than having people work backwards from what's in the lists, or assume the decisions were made lightly.

Onto the points you've raised:

The SM have four characters, the Squats have three, two if you accept the fact that the Warlord is actually an upgrade for the Lord unit.


First off, you've not counted the Ancestor Lord.  That makes four.  Not three/two.

The Space Marines have ONE character.  Guard have three, Orks two.

The number of character types is determined by the battlefield role, rather than the background.  Typically one character to be provide a supreme commander reroll, one to be a regular commander and others to provide oddball effects.  Guildmasters, Warlords and Lords all seem too similar to warrant different entries.   No need for subtle distinctions of rank.

The Tunneler Rules are the same as those given in the Epic-A rule book for tunnelers, we didn't change anything Jervis wrote them.

I cannot find these anywhere.  Section 4?  Where?  There are a few references to 'tunnels' in Section 5.

[Tunnellers'] weapons are almost entirely defensive in nature and actually slow down the formations they are part of.

But why do they have weapons?  They're not on the models, or in the background.  You're just adding them for the sake of it.

No one in a couple of years of using the list has found this to be a problem.

I can't be the first, surely?

Again in years of using the list now the rules for it [the Ironhawk] spotting haven't been a problem with anyone before.

Well, here are the problems:

1.  The Colossus, and in fact all War Engines don't require any LoS to perform indirect fire.  So the Ironhawk is unneccessary.

2.  Since the Ironhawk's in the Colossus's formation, it can't get far enough away to "spot" (whatever that will be) in any meaningful sense.

3.  When resolving fire against the Colossus, it causes faff.  For starters it's a light vehicle, the Colossus isn't, so working out how to shoot at the formation is tricky ...

I suggest that the Ironhawk is just a decorative model assumed to be zipping around wherever, and having no in-game effect.

Unless the rules are in the correct version you mention.

The model used for the Spartan IS the Rhino, it just has a different name and a better AP weapon system.

Well, the description its given ("it closely resembles the Adeptus Astartes Razorback") makes it sound like you should be using Razorback models, or even Exodus Wars stuff.

[On Thudd Guns]Because the Siege Masters version is the Imperial standard and the Squat version is not. Again we did not want to follow exactly with the Imperium as Squats ARE different.

So it was a conscious decision?  I thought it'd just happened as Thurgrim's was done before the Epic supplements were released.

I have heard this so many times from people who have only read the list, and never used it.

Well, hear it now from someone who's read the list and used it.

The weapons are the ones it had in SM/TL, fair enough.  But just do a quick comparison with a Warlord Titan.

Warlord - 850 points

2 x Turbo-Laser Destructors
Gatling Blaster
Volcano Cannon

Colossus - 450 points

D'Day Cannon
4xBattlecannons
4xBattlecannons
Thunderer Cannon
Plasma Missiles

It's a nice rough comparison, as the Squat Super Heavies kinda fulfilled a similar role to Titans in the other armies.  Far too many weapons for its paltry cost.  I've shied away from the Cyclops as the Hellfury Pulse is rather devestating.

Anyway, my comments are rubbing people up.  Well, I see it as debate.  I would like to contribute to the next step in the Squat list, so forgive my tone and let me adjust in the spirit of co-operation.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Thurgrim's Stronghold comments
PostPosted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:24 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 12:28 pm
Posts: 362
I look forward to your summation.

Second question, have you looked at the Demiurg list to compare unit stats?

_________________
Squat/Demiurg Army Co-Champion (in cahoots with Jaldon)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Thurgrim's Stronghold comments
PostPosted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:42 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 8:41 pm
Posts: 1480
Location: Gothenburg,Sweden
Not enterly true that.
If I want a Mazda, why then test drive an Opel?

And I'm not able to invest the time to get the Fiat going.
So I'll have make do with the Volvo.

_________________
It would be nice to get lightspeed,
so far we can only reach slight speed.
- Erik M
092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 83 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 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