|
Post by RedsandRoyals on Mar 3, 2010 15:06:44 GMT -5
Gotta agree with Makarova, they're too random for Vets or Stormies, although Gunslingers is the only one I can see making sense (for Vets). Remember, Stormies can't have everything. And RT, you're right, being that angry doesn't make you into an Ork. That's why their statline ISN'T that of an Ork. Being that psychotically driven to kill, to stab, to rip flesh from bone, that's what this ability represents. They wound easier because they are that driven to do so, not because they hulk out and turn into a Space Marine. That's why they lose it once they're locked in CC, and why they don't get it when they're charged. Khorne Berzerkers get FC on the exact same principle. They are THAT driven to kill. Reds
|
|
|
Post by cheminhaler on Mar 3, 2010 15:40:04 GMT -5
I quite like the random chart thingy they have now. Rogue Trader days were different, of course. There was a Techpriest controlling the explosive collars, and it was like a 'summary execution' if they failed a morale test.
Last Chancers was a nod to the 'Dirty Dozen', there's no denying it. Forget explosive collars and all that jazz - it's the pure Lee Marvin = Colonel Schaeffer thing.
I think if you're doing Penal then give the army list writers the choice of A or B. A = sci-fi Penal troop scum with explosive collars (troops choice) B = An elite unit of elite scumbags, led by Lee Marvin with a bionic arm(elite)
...and if you didn't know 'Donald Duck is waiting at the crossroad, with a machine gun', is from the Dirty Dozen. Donald was the thirteenth one.
|
|
|
Post by Makarova (M.I.A) on Mar 3, 2010 15:44:32 GMT -5
So...
A = Guardsmen or Conscripts with chem-inhalers representing determination caused by collars. B = Current Penal Legion profile, elite choice. No Lee Marvin however, if I included someone like that it'd have to be a special character and I'm above adding them where they're not needed. Besides we already have Schaeffer, no real need for another Penal boss character.
What do you guys think? Seems like a compromise.
|
|
|
Post by cheminhaler on Mar 3, 2010 16:29:50 GMT -5
The 4th edition Scheaffer rules were just so mad. You could split them up, have a whole army of psykers, give them any equipment. The only bugbear was the enormous points costs. Option B should be something like that.
|
|
|
Post by Makarova (M.I.A) on Mar 3, 2010 16:33:59 GMT -5
No. Way too complicated and will only be abused and/or exploited by people to create anything they want, either for fluff or game effectiveness. I might as well make a unit called "Elite Soldiers" and give them the option for everything.
I'm rather satisfied with them as they are. Maybe I'll remake special characters some day, in that case the Last Chancers will be included.
|
|
|
Post by RedsandRoyals on Mar 3, 2010 16:43:50 GMT -5
Yeah, the old rules of the Last Chancers were utterly bonkers. I do prefer the new rules.
Perhaps if you changed the name? You could have the mass of conscripts with the Chem Inhalers and such, then shift the Penal Troops to elites and call them "Penal Legion Kill Team" to represent them being just that little bit better.
Reds
|
|
|
Post by cheminhaler on Mar 3, 2010 16:48:38 GMT -5
Has anyone else noticed that PL don't have frags in the current IG codex? Do you think it's because they don't trust those psychos with grenades? Kind of harsh on the custodian.
|
|
|
Post by Makarova (M.I.A) on Mar 3, 2010 17:03:59 GMT -5
Reds: There won't be a named Troops unit with a penal theme, they will have to be represented through doctrines like I mentioned. Making a new unit is kind of unnecessary. I don't know about the Kill-Team or the unit in general still though, as it's a relatively obscure, specialised unit and I like to avoid those in codexes when I can. I'll give it some thought.
Chem: There's probably some plan behind the loss of frags, special weapons and transports. Or not.
|
|
|
Post by Adam Selene on Mar 5, 2010 3:15:15 GMT -5
After much thought I decided to make heavy stubbers special weapons. Yes, everyone will spam command squads and veterans with 3 or 4 of them. But they already do with all other special weapons, and it's damn effective (especially plasma, melta and flamers), so I don't see why I couldn't add in another just as good option there. For more versatility if nothing else, the poor things really need a proper fire support special weapon that isn't an unreliable grenade launcher or a bloody plasma gun. They cost 10 pts each, hopefully a fair cost. Will also give this an overhaul soon, with the WD doctrines and a proper unit roster and profiles for the changed units, collected together in the first post. how about the first heavy stubber is 5pts, the second is 7pts, then 9, 11, ect. rationalization: one stubber would be easy to find but getting three of four in the one squad would alert the departmento munitorium accountant (penny pinchers)
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on Mar 5, 2010 3:40:42 GMT -5
That would apply to meltaguns, plasma guns, flamers and grenade launchers just as much.
|
|
|
Post by Makarova (M.I.A) on Mar 5, 2010 5:19:53 GMT -5
Way too complicated and unnecessary.
|
|
|
Post by Jackal-0311 on Mar 17, 2010 15:28:32 GMT -5
One thing that has always annoyed me is the sniper issue. I think its cool that you have corrected it! What about giving snipers some kind of camo cloak or chameleon equipment/ability? What makes a sniper is not just his/her ability to shoot but also the ability to blend in with the surrounding terrain. Infiltrate just gets them to the location but does nothing for cover and concealment. Just a thought!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2010 5:08:46 GMT -5
Sure the spiper rules are better, but I still dislike sniper squads. To me a sniper and spotter type set-up would be more appropriate, but hey, that's just me.
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on Mar 18, 2010 5:43:59 GMT -5
Infantryman: Nah, Ratlings already have it 'naturally' and the only way I see that a common army sniper would get Stealth is through cameloline which is expensive, rare and very non-standard except for some regiments. You can get it through the doctrine though.
Dnamna: I thought a lot about that, but my goal was also to make snipers useful and not only fluffy, and 3 blokes with their spotters simply still suck.
In other news I'm going to give this remake an overhaul soon. I made a mistake in making the update better than the original codex, it was only supposed to give you more options and flexibility, not actually make an already very good book better. Basically Veterans will get a slight nerf and cost another point in cost, but will keep their improvements (ergo, demo charges bought as common equipment, cheaper 'pace through the doctrine and so). Most doctrines will also now work on a regimental level and must be applied to the entire army. I wanted people to be able to play different kinds of regiments with different training, not to get a stash of various special rules they can apply to whoever can use it to the best effect. Veterans will have a bit more freedom, but you'll get more on that soon.
/Makarova
|
|
|
Post by MrBojab on May 10, 2010 7:09:24 GMT -5
What happened to the Abhuman regiments?
Also thought i should ad something
Autogun R=18 S=2 Ap=- Special 2
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on May 10, 2010 7:22:50 GMT -5
No, that's not an autogun. Autoguns have profiles identical to lasguns, and have had since 2nd Ed.
|
|
|
Post by Julian Sharps on May 10, 2010 10:36:07 GMT -5
08th Corvis Doctrines:
Airborne Infantry Veteran Platoons Die Hards Carapace Armor Chem-Inhalers
The great thing about this setup (doctrines plus new codex) is how modular my list is at 2,000 points (should I be assuming that Veteran squads in a platoon are essentially identical to solitary Veteran squads?). 2 platoons of 25 men each, 6 valks, a command section with chimera (I paid the points for deep striking even though I have no intention of deploying it that way), a Vendetta and a Sentinel mostly forces me to play at a company level (which is nice) and can even be scaled down to platoon level if need be (since at that point I'd just be taking lone vet squads and a CCS). However, I'm beginning to think that 9 plasma guns, 8 meltaguns and 6 heavy stubbers might be a bit much What am I saying!? That's pretty much normal firepower for me!
|
|
|
Post by Rolling Thunder on May 10, 2010 10:40:51 GMT -5
Actually, veteran platoons are have the same equipment options as normal platoons. Including the heavy weapons teams and the special weapons. They just happen to be staffed by veterans.
|
|
|
Post by Makarova (M.I.A) on May 10, 2010 10:42:00 GMT -5
Veteran Platoon squads can only have one special and one heavy weapon, same options as a normal infantry squad (so normal single troop choice veterans are still good as specialists).
Abhumans are on the list. Updating this has a low priority right now though. Studying, moving and I actually prefer to keep my own army more or less vanilla to make it easier playing games at clubs with nice people. My remake efforts goes into WHFB.
|
|
|
Post by MrBojab on May 10, 2010 17:00:08 GMT -5
Come on, think about how fun it would be to turn up with a heap of beastmen and tell people there veterans. Also all my guard playing friends(11) need you to add some more. All we are doing is having 2 lists 1 normal codex and another for our friendlies using these and special characters
|
|
|
Post by Makarova (M.I.A) on May 10, 2010 17:22:37 GMT -5
It's not about adding, it's about revamping and overhauling.
It'll get done when I have more time.
|
|
|
Post by MrBojab on May 10, 2010 18:59:19 GMT -5
Also it would be cool if you made a doctrine that allowed for cavalry to ride on animals and constructs other than horses that changed their profile
|
|
|
Post by privateflippy on May 11, 2010 22:14:19 GMT -5
make extra rules for different types of sentinels
|
|
|
Post by Makarova (M.I.A) on May 11, 2010 23:18:17 GMT -5
MrBojab: Complicated, but a possibility.
privateflippy: Make me a sandwich.
|
|
|
Post by MrBojab on May 12, 2010 6:02:10 GMT -5
Ignore Flippy he is one of the 11
|
|