Page 5 of 6

Re: 2250 v3 CD vs. O&G

PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 5:05 pm
by allanmcnab
This was even before people knew I was an easy win. of course they might have been too busy complaining about my bad personality, or my atrocious hygiene. or perhaps they were just relieved to be playing anyone other than you, or Larry (god on earthtm) Mottolla

Re: 2250 v3 CD vs. O&G

PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 5:09 pm
by mattbird
maybe they were distracted, wondering what was beneath that kilt..?

Re: 2250 v3 CD vs. O&G

PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 5:15 pm
by allanmcnab
I know thats how I tricked nidal into a draw

Re: 2250 v3 CD vs. O&G

PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:23 pm
by Hashuts Scion
So,

Lets agree that we will playtest to death the new aspects and see if they are any better than v3. I think people may be surprised just how powerful all these daemonic engines will be. The list will also be a little more predictable with HP, 3 Ds or fighting types and 1 scroll caddy. Each army has a uniqueness to it. What will be ours?

Bob

Re: 2250 v3 CD vs. O&G

PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 10:02 am
by DarkbloodSkullpulper
I would be intrigued to see if it would be possible to get both rampaging warmachines and the "bound phase" into the same CD list, because both to me really do work well with the metafluff for the CD. I suspect that if daemonic engines were added to the V3 list as is, it would be over the tipping point of having too much different/unique/new in the list. Just from that, I think the list would go from its current feel of a slightly quirky but tight list to one that sprawls out all over in an undefinable mush. Maybe I just need more coffee, though.

Given a choice between the two, I'd opt for the bound phase for aesthetic reasons, though I think that if the daemonic engine rules are done right, it would be a more potent addition to the list.

If the daemonic engine rule is put back in for playtesting, I would hope that it sticks closer to the Hellcannon rules rather than the special rule added in for V4. Rampaging warmachines don't do much good if they are not unbreakable, or at least stubborn. The gradation in strength/toughness/attacks going from the eruption gun up to the Hellcannon also seemed to me the way to go, if the addition of that rule was to be reconsidered.

Re: 2250 v3 CD vs. O&G

PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 10:26 am
by mattbird
The rampaging part of Daemonic Engines would not be a benefit, it would be a limitation. They could possibly be stubborn on their own low leadership, which was like 4 IIRC? Unbreakable would be too much, IMO.

Re: 2250 v3 CD vs. O&G

PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 12:28 pm
by elrodogg
The crew should make the warmachine stubborn on their own leadership, same as the dwarf rule "gunner's pride". Kill the crew in h2h and the machine will likely break and be destroyed.

Re: 2250 v3 CD vs. O&G

PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:04 pm
by mattbird
you'd have to significantly up the points, if they test on stubborn 9 from the crew...

Re: 2250 v3 CD vs. O&G

PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:09 pm
by elrodogg
mattbird wrote:you'd have to significantly up the points, if they test on stubborn 9 from the crew...


Never been opposed to points increases if they are worth it. I would guess +10-15ish points for stubborn crew. They are afterall only 3 T4 dudes. It isn't as if dwarf warmachines are all that much more expensive then their counterparts in other armies. For example, the dwarf stone thrower is 80 and the orc stone thrower is 70. For that extra 10 pts you get stubborn and extra leadership.

Re: 2250 v3 CD vs. O&G

PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:21 pm
by mattbird
yeah, different army though. Orcs get other things Dwarfs don't, etc.

I am not opposed to the idea, so long as it's costed correctly.