Uziel
Vargheist
- Aug 29, 2011
- 687
DoN:
-"Most" of the VC characters can NOT take over without any harm if the general dies. You have to have multiple characters, "alive" on the board, with Lore of Vampires, to have any chance of having someone take over as general etc.. If all locusts (whom I so far imagine will be more common than VC Lore of Vampire characters) can take over as general, we are certainly not worse off than the Vampire Counts army, and we are far better than the TK army.
-As far as the wight blades go, I agree that it is not such a big deal in general, and the issue for me if it really warrants 1 point increase or not. If not, we get a better deal for no price, and if it does, we might easily be paying too much. There has been no discussion on this yet, so its just something to keep in mind.
-As far as the panicking living element, this most likely won't be a big deal, as we also have to consider a that the BSB more often than not will be close to the general, and if this is the case you have a re-roll on said panic tests. Those outside the BSB range are most likely "Safe" in any case. Yes, one can reduce LD to compensate for this, but unless you set it quite low, it will very rarely make an impact on the game.
-As to the marching, I didn't state that this was the case, but that it had been suggested. The point was, that together with the general, the rituals, the zenophytes special rule, etc, there wouldn't really be much of a march limitation to the army in the hands of a half-decent general. My point was that we should be careful that we don't make too many options of overcoming the army limitations. As it stands now, we will be far better at marching than the VC list, and certainly the TK one. Both those armies are severely limited, especially in larger battles.
-yes, the agreed rule was ItP, but a) stubborn has been suggested afterwards and b) you suggested Unbreakable for the Nagashi cultists on a unit basis, really only leaving the Favoured ones and the Dark Riders (who are more than likely outside the IP range of the general most of the time anyway) being affected by Immune to Panic. This is what I was referring to. My point was that the rule became a little pointless if it was only really going to be meaningfull on the Favoured ones (with Dark riders too far away, and cultists all being unbreakable within the IP range)...
-I know nothing has been settled on on the black armour, and that is why I'm urging caution at this stage. With the -1 to strength being suggested back at the troop level, I think it is fair to speak up before this makes the cut so to speak.
-I wasn't discussing the stats of the "hierophant" directly, but rather how vulnerable the TK list can be with the Hierophant option for keeping the army on its feet. I think this is an option that CAN make the TK list far more vulnerable than the VC one vs many armies in the game.
I know a lot has not been decided on yet DoN, but I think it is far better to make a list that is at v.1.0 comes out slightly weaker than your "average" list in the game, because it will then be MUCH easier to get people to play against you and to game test the army than if you go for an epic one which will make people shun away from playing the list. It is easier to adjust things upwards afterward, than having to reduce things. Yes, I like to err on the side of caution because of this, but I don't see this as a fault when doing something like this.
I still disagree with you that I have gone too far the other way though; but if that is the general consensus here, I realize that I might as well spend my time better constructively on other matters and someday put my suggested ideas and units to use on my own project. If I can't find common ground with you at the Army rules/Core units stage, I think perhaps that the differences will perhaps only escalate unfortunately (at least if some of the more unbalancing suggestions do gain a foothold this early), and I have no interest spending my time being the one irritating one whom doesn't see eye to eye with the rest of the group.
As to your specific suggestions DoN:
-Your graded armour options seems much more balanced than what I've seen so far, and I'm on board with this. The Troop/Character division is more than adequate I think.
-Not sure I like the Leaderhip of Champions to reduce crumble, as champions generally have the same LD as the troops they lead. Small issue though, and it wouldn't really be necessary If there was no such difference to be found anywhere in the list to begin with (which is the norm so to speak).
Yes, the LD test and potential damage does make up for more Locusts (than comparable VC army Lore of Vampire wizards). Depending on how the characters will look, this seems to place us just slightly below the power level of the VC list as far as this issue goes, which is I think is the "region" where we should be.
It is not what I would have wanted to see, as it is too similar to the VC list in my opinion, and could allow for high LD characters that are not Wizards take over as General (Ld 9-10 with a potential re-roll from the BSB is next to no issue at all), but if this is what the general consensus wants, then it is a pretty fair deal, depending offcoure a little on who the Locusts will be.
-"Most" of the VC characters can NOT take over without any harm if the general dies. You have to have multiple characters, "alive" on the board, with Lore of Vampires, to have any chance of having someone take over as general etc.. If all locusts (whom I so far imagine will be more common than VC Lore of Vampire characters) can take over as general, we are certainly not worse off than the Vampire Counts army, and we are far better than the TK army.
-As far as the wight blades go, I agree that it is not such a big deal in general, and the issue for me if it really warrants 1 point increase or not. If not, we get a better deal for no price, and if it does, we might easily be paying too much. There has been no discussion on this yet, so its just something to keep in mind.
-As far as the panicking living element, this most likely won't be a big deal, as we also have to consider a that the BSB more often than not will be close to the general, and if this is the case you have a re-roll on said panic tests. Those outside the BSB range are most likely "Safe" in any case. Yes, one can reduce LD to compensate for this, but unless you set it quite low, it will very rarely make an impact on the game.
-As to the marching, I didn't state that this was the case, but that it had been suggested. The point was, that together with the general, the rituals, the zenophytes special rule, etc, there wouldn't really be much of a march limitation to the army in the hands of a half-decent general. My point was that we should be careful that we don't make too many options of overcoming the army limitations. As it stands now, we will be far better at marching than the VC list, and certainly the TK one. Both those armies are severely limited, especially in larger battles.
-yes, the agreed rule was ItP, but a) stubborn has been suggested afterwards and b) you suggested Unbreakable for the Nagashi cultists on a unit basis, really only leaving the Favoured ones and the Dark Riders (who are more than likely outside the IP range of the general most of the time anyway) being affected by Immune to Panic. This is what I was referring to. My point was that the rule became a little pointless if it was only really going to be meaningfull on the Favoured ones (with Dark riders too far away, and cultists all being unbreakable within the IP range)...
-I know nothing has been settled on on the black armour, and that is why I'm urging caution at this stage. With the -1 to strength being suggested back at the troop level, I think it is fair to speak up before this makes the cut so to speak.
-I wasn't discussing the stats of the "hierophant" directly, but rather how vulnerable the TK list can be with the Hierophant option for keeping the army on its feet. I think this is an option that CAN make the TK list far more vulnerable than the VC one vs many armies in the game.
I know a lot has not been decided on yet DoN, but I think it is far better to make a list that is at v.1.0 comes out slightly weaker than your "average" list in the game, because it will then be MUCH easier to get people to play against you and to game test the army than if you go for an epic one which will make people shun away from playing the list. It is easier to adjust things upwards afterward, than having to reduce things. Yes, I like to err on the side of caution because of this, but I don't see this as a fault when doing something like this.
I still disagree with you that I have gone too far the other way though; but if that is the general consensus here, I realize that I might as well spend my time better constructively on other matters and someday put my suggested ideas and units to use on my own project. If I can't find common ground with you at the Army rules/Core units stage, I think perhaps that the differences will perhaps only escalate unfortunately (at least if some of the more unbalancing suggestions do gain a foothold this early), and I have no interest spending my time being the one irritating one whom doesn't see eye to eye with the rest of the group.
As to your specific suggestions DoN:
-Your graded armour options seems much more balanced than what I've seen so far, and I'm on board with this. The Troop/Character division is more than adequate I think.
-Not sure I like the Leaderhip of Champions to reduce crumble, as champions generally have the same LD as the troops they lead. Small issue though, and it wouldn't really be necessary If there was no such difference to be found anywhere in the list to begin with (which is the norm so to speak).
Yes, the LD test and potential damage does make up for more Locusts (than comparable VC army Lore of Vampire wizards). Depending on how the characters will look, this seems to place us just slightly below the power level of the VC list as far as this issue goes, which is I think is the "region" where we should be.
It is not what I would have wanted to see, as it is too similar to the VC list in my opinion, and could allow for high LD characters that are not Wizards take over as General (Ld 9-10 with a potential re-roll from the BSB is next to no issue at all), but if this is what the general consensus wants, then it is a pretty fair deal, depending offcoure a little on who the Locusts will be.