News: No news is good news...

Login  |  Register

Author Topic: Squats RT-list for 6th Ed  (Read 44647 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Rasmus

  • The Ratcatcher
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33046
  • Country: 00
  • Lost Roads are now found!
    • 40kOnline
  • Armies: Squats
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #40 on: January 5, 2009, 02:10:57 AM »
Each unit will get an illustration on the armylist as well, as soon as I actually have all of mine painted up. I have held off taking photos of half the army, but I am only two batches left from completing it now, so it should not be too long until can add those pictures too.

Lost Roads - finally released!


YouTube-clip of my Squat army.

Offline Locarno

  • Ork Boy
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6488
  • Country: 00
  • Could I interest you in a small bribe?
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #41 on: January 8, 2009, 09:14:33 AM »
Glad to see this is still being developed. It's a very well made fan codex.

Thoughts:

1) Special Rules
Ancestral Hatred - Manifests as Preferred Enemy against Tyranids but as Furious Charge against Orks? Seems a little bizzare - not least because your units all have Furious Charge anyway!
Possibly the simplest way to do this would be - as with thousand sons and space wolves - to have mutual Preferred Enemy. Essentially ratchets the slaughter up a notch without favouring either side; exactly what a specific-to-a-single-opponent rule should do.

Bezerker - Furious Charge is nice and simple, and at I2 it's only really the strength bonus that matters (unless you're being charged by a Warlord, but then you should be screwed anyway...)

Superior Technology Good. Note: Clarify that it does not work (at least I assume it does not work) for plasma pistols and plasma cannon carried by Commissar Advisors and Tech-Priests, since their guns would have 'come from home'.

Brothers in Arms Effectively an And They Shall Know No Fear equivalent, helping keep the troops in line as long as the battle line stays together. Reference to Last Man Standing tests can be removed.

Fat of Foot Elegant. The previous edition's problem with slowing them down was adding random movement to the entire army, which feels a bit odd. This is exactly the reverse....
To be honest I was surprised that this wasn't a condition of Slow and Purposeful.

Advisors The current 'medic' types in Codex: Space Marines and Codex: Orks just give the squad Feel No Pain without conditions. I'm generally a fan of simpler special rules, and 'grants universal special rule X' is about as simple as it gets. Also notice that the conditions for medic and standard bearer don't match; the medic stops working if pinned, the standard doesn't..........but the medic works when fleeing and the standard doesn't. Similar rules with slight differences create situations where people can't remember which way round the rule works, and have to hunt through the codex...something to avoid if possible.

Heavy Charge Is that on top of or instead of the +1S and +1I for Furious Charge gained using Bezerker?


Vindicator - no special rules here, but note that the demolisher cannon does not have a 'high arced trajectory'. Anyone claiming the space marine vindicator's demolisher cannon can fire indirectly is knowingly exploiting a typo....

Deep Strike A bit too good, maybe. Yes, the 'surfacing explosion' is nasty but the machine has no weapons after this, but it's armour 13 and not open-topped, which makes killing it substaintially harder than the 'free kill point' that is the drop pod.

The 'surfacing explosion' could do with simplifying; why is there a significantly different rule for vehicles? At 6" range, the effect is a handful of thrown loose rock; if it's strength 5, it's strength 5 and it shouldn't be able to hurt a Land Raider. Equally, the 'roll two dice and pick the lowest' can be ignored - realistically Strength 5 will only ever glance things anyway.

I think it'd probably work out, though, cost-wise IF it didn't have the rule "If this movement takes it into impassible terrain or off the board, reduce scatter by the minimum needed to prevent this". Drop pods can't do this and neither should termites. You can't see "the edge of the board" to tunnel round (like, say, a hill), nor does it move to get out of your way (like an enemy unit). Being able to aim at the corner and hence ignore 75% of scatter results is too good. Also, you need to add "or an enemy unit".

Lastly, it doesn't matter (since the termite has no shooting weapon) but it should be BS4 to be consistant with the STC vehicles. Apparently a cowboy hat adds +1 BS to a squat....  ;D

Inspiring Fair enough. A bubble of Ld 10 is very nice....

Tinkering Skills Seems a bit cheap for a techmarine-but-better, but then I suppose he doesn't have the same fighting power. The techmarine gets a power fist attack and artificer armour, so fair enough.

Domination A unit under synapse cover IS immune to pinning. I'd remove that from the list unless you want it to affect fearless troops as well, which clearly (to me) you don't given the last sentance.

Force Dome I realise you got there first, but there is now an 'official' power with the same name but a different effect. Not a great situation.... A focused 4++ rather than an area 5++ seems sensible and works quite well.

Hammer of Fury Nice! With only a 9" range and a shooting power it's very situational but it can potentially destroy an entire squad. I'd be tempted to drop it still further to 6" but then I'm leery of uber-psyker powers (yes, I know how nasty they used to be - that's WHY I'm cautious of them!). At 150 points you have a model that can obliterate an entire ork mob - hitting everything within 9" automatically gives you an 18" diameter blast, and the guy can be tooling around in the sidecar of a bike (not to mention that he's T6 when he does so). Note that I'm not objecting - yes, he should be that hard. But Hammer of Fury itself devastates too large an area if facing a light infantry army to be only a 10 point upgrade on "one squad takes a pinning test".


Advisor-Veterans - a generic command squad/command HQ/retinue equivalent. Note that plasma guns have gone up in price for a reason (the reduced chance of overheating). Given the Superior Technology rule and the Advisor-Veterans' BS4 they should definitely be more than 10 points here. In a regular combat-squad Superior Technology and the lower BS probably cancel out.

Hearthguard - 6 points for a power weapon for what resembles a Vanguard Veteran with Furious Charge? 10, Maybe, more like 15. These guys get 4 strength 5 attacks each on the charge, remember (because why would you ever not use Bezerker when all you give up is a laspistol shot?)

Ratlings, Commissars, Techpriests - Imperial Guard units. Not for commenting on here, except that (a) a Commissar doesn't have a transport option, and (b) a Commissar is NOT worth his standard points cost without the Summary Execution rule, since that includes his +1Ld boost (which squats don't need anyway since both the Warlord and Living Ancestor can project Ld10 across swathes of the battlefield). Something more like 20 points is appropriate given his reduced utility.

Combat-Squad - Personally I think those heavy weapons are horrendously cheap (especially the lascannon) and availible in far too high a number, but then I've not played against the army, so it's not my place to comment. The veteran upgrade is too expensive given that it's just an extra attack and no skills or leadership boosts.

Assault-Squad - Countercharge is '5 points a model' for veteran advisors, but a flat fee of 10 points for an assault-squad regardless of size? Even if the price varies, I advise consistency in the way the price is charged.

Support-Squad - Heavy weapon numbers is something you've playtested, but prices still low. 10 points to give (potentially) half a dozen lascannons Tank Hunter - when those lascannons are only 15 points each - verges on imbalanced. I know you have to take a Combat-Squad first, but they are hardly poor units themselves...

Guild Bikers - Fair enough

Guild Weapon Teams - it's been mentioned before that there are official equivalents of some of these, but you've already commented that you prefer your own versions. Fair enough. My only complaint is the Mole Mortar's auto-glance: other 'drilling' weapons, and minefields, automatically hit the rear armour. This seems sensible and I'd prefer it to automatically hurting even a land raider with what is basically a whirlwind shell. Other than that, I like them all.



Stories to read....
Songs of Earth
The Will to Survive Series

Tervigon Army List:
Games Played: 35
Termagants expended for the Hive Mind: ~2685

Offline Rasmus

  • The Ratcatcher
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33046
  • Country: 00
  • Lost Roads are now found!
    • 40kOnline
  • Armies: Squats
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #42 on: January 8, 2009, 10:04:13 AM »
Food for thought here. I will get back to the math of this wehn I get the file back up, but for now I can do some basics.

1) Special Rules
Ancestral Hatred - Manifests as Preferred Enemy against Tyranids but as Furious Charge against Orks? Seems a little bizzare - not least because your units all have Furious Charge anyway!
   That's not what it says though, and you are right, it is a bit of a sore spot to be honest. I will see how I can work this out.

Quote
Superior Technology Good. Note: Clarify that it does not work (at least I assume it does not work) for plasma pistols and plasma cannon carried by Commissar Advisors and Tech-Priests, since their guns would have 'come from home'.
   Do the Commisars get squat weapons? I didn't think this needed clarifications, but I will work it in there somehow.

Quote
Brothers in Arms Effectively an And They Shall Know No Fear equivalent, helping keep the troops in line as long as the battle line stays together. Reference to Last Man Standing tests can be removed.
   Ah yes, simplify simplify simplify.

Quote
Fat of Foot Elegant. The previous edition's problem with slowing them down was adding random movement to the entire army, which feels a bit odd. This is exactly the reverse....
To be honest I was surprised that this wasn't a condition of Slow and Purposeful.
I was delighted when Run turned up, as it just solved all of this so perfectly.


Quote
Heavy Charge Is that on top of or instead of the +1S and +1I for Furious Charge gained using Bezerker?
  Yes, will write something to that effect.

Quote
Vindicator - no special rules here, but note that the demolisher cannon does not have a 'high arced trajectory'. Anyone claiming the space marine vindicator's demolisher cannon can fire indirectly is knowingly exploiting a typo....
  I figured this was best left to a simple "works as in codex". Saves a lot of work in trying to keep up with the current interpretation of just these sort of typos.

Quote
Deep Strike A bit too good, maybe. Yes, the 'surfacing explosion' is nasty but the machine has no weapons after this, but it's armour 13 and not open-topped, which makes killing it substaintially harder than the 'free kill point' that is the drop pod.
  The termine has not gone through a lot of playtesting, and that's why it has not been balanced yet. It's only been deployed a handful of times, and never with any drastic results.

Quote
Force Dome I realise you got there first, but there is now an 'official' power with the same name but a different effect. Not a great situation.... A focused 4++ rather than an area 5++ seems sensible and works quite well.
  It was called Force Dom in 2nd ed. Not my fault if they keep reusing the same names over and over. :)

Quote
Hammer of Fury Nice! With only a 9" range and a shooting power it's very situational but it can potentially destroy an entire squad. I'd be tempted to drop it still further to 6" but then I'm leery of uber-psyker powers (yes, I know how nasty they used to be - that's WHY I'm cautious of them!). At 150 points you have a model that can obliterate an entire ork mob - hitting everything within 9" automatically gives you an 18" diameter blast, and the guy can be tooling around in the sidecar of a bike (not to mention that he's T6 when he does so). Note that I'm not objecting - yes, he should be that hard. But Hammer of Fury itself devastates too large an area if facing a light infantry army to be only a 10 point upgrade on "one squad takes a pinning test".
   Yeah, this is another one of those things that have only gone through mathhammer and not a lot of playtesting yet. However, he is getting his baldspot painted this weekend, and should be rolling onto the field in a week or so, so we'll find out.

Quote
Advisor-Veterans - a generic command squad/command HQ/retinue equivalent. Note that plasma guns have gone up in price for a reason (the reduced chance of overheating). Given the Superior Technology rule and the Advisor-Veterans' BS4 they should definitely be more than 10 points here. In a regular combat-squad Superior Technology and the lower BS probably cancel out.
I will look into that.

Quote
Hearthguard - 6 points for a power weapon for what resembles a Vanguard Veteran with Furious Charge? 10, Maybe, more like 15. These guys get 4 strength 5 attacks each on the charge, remember (because why would you ever not use Bezerker when all you give up is a laspistol shot?)
   This is yet another unit that I have not had the chance to playtest too much yet. I know that the pointcosts for their upgrades are off by a mile, but I have not had the chance to blaance it yet, simply because I have not seen them in action enough.

Quote
Ratlings, Commissars, Techpriests - Imperial Guard units. Not for commenting on here, except that (a) a Commissar doesn't have a transport option, and (b) a Commissar is NOT worth his standard points cost without the Summary Execution rule, since that includes his +1Ld boost (which squats don't need anyway since both the Warlord and Living Ancestor can project Ld10 across swathes of the battlefield). Something more like 20 points is appropriate given his reduced utility.
If you don't want to bring him; don't bring him. :) I am not tinkering with points from another codex simply because he does not dare to shoot the things he is to "advice". I will make a note as to the fact that they are not squats though.

Quote
Combat-Squad - Personally I think those heavy weapons are horrendously cheap (especially the lascannon) and availible in far too high a number, but then I've not played against the army, so it's not my place to comment. The veteran upgrade is too expensive given that it's just an extra attack and no skills or leadership boosts.
   Will get back to this when I have the file open for editing.

Quote
Assault-Squad - Countercharge is '5 points a model' for veteran advisors, but a flat fee of 10 points for an assault-squad regardless of size? Even if the price varies, I advise consistency in the way the price is charged.
  Same here. Watch this space.

Quote
Guild Weapon Teams - it's been mentioned before that there are official equivalents of some of these, but you've already commented that you prefer your own versions. Fair enough. My only complaint is the Mole Mortar's auto-glance: other 'drilling' weapons, and minefields, automatically hit the rear armour. This seems sensible and I'd prefer it to automatically hurting even a land raider with what is basically a whirlwind shell. Other than that, I like them all.
  I will look into that as well.


Basically I have a few more things to place onto the list and change, but I am waiting for my models to get paint on them, take pictures of them and place them as illustrations in the list. I only have one batch of bikers and my advisors to go before all of that is done. The Extra Armour on the advisorsquad's rhino got glued on and given welding-spots last night, so it is not far off. Also, one of my playtesters just fried her computer, so she will be less occupied killing Scourge in Naxx for a while, which would speed up the playtesting somewhat. :)


Edit: Some of this has been taken aboard for playtesting. I will get back to uploading 1.21 or later when it has a few battles to report in on (should be next week or something possibly).
« Last Edit: January 8, 2009, 01:34:31 PM by Rasmus »

Lost Roads - finally released!


YouTube-clip of my Squat army.

Offline Locarno

  • Ork Boy
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6488
  • Country: 00
  • Could I interest you in a small bribe?
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #43 on: January 9, 2009, 05:59:43 AM »
Quote
That's not what it says though, and you are right, it is a bit of a sore spot to be honest. I will see how I can work this out.

Possibly just two-way 'preferred enemy' (i.e. both parties gain preferred enemy against one another)? It racks up the slaughter a notch without favouring either side, like the Space Wolves/Thousand Sons rule.

Quote
Basically I have a few more things to place onto the list and change, but I am waiting for my models to get paint on them, take pictures of them and place them as illustrations in the list. I only have one batch of bikers and my advisors to go before all of that is done. The Extra Armour on the advisorsquad's rhino got glued on and given welding-spots last night, so it is not far off. Also, one of my playtesters just fried her computer, so she will be less occupied killing Scourge in Naxx for a while, which would speed up the playtesting somewhat.

Awesome. Look forward to seeing the Living Ancestor in action. It'd be good to get some battle reports of the playtests on the forum, actually......

Stories to read....
Songs of Earth
The Will to Survive Series

Tervigon Army List:
Games Played: 35
Termagants expended for the Hive Mind: ~2685

Offline Illumini

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 332
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #44 on: January 19, 2009, 07:04:59 AM »
I agree with Locarno on all his points, parts of the codex is very nice, and seem pretty balanced, but especially the troops-section seems hideously overpowered. You can get 9 heavy bolters for 150pts, IG get 6 for 160, at T3 + not scoring.

When you go with lascannons at only 15pts a piece, (why? They cost more in every other codex), and with the option for tankhunters at the measly cost of 10pts (why would anyone not take this?), you pretty much get 9 railguns for 235pts, very brutal. Let's we match this up against guard again, as they are pretty close: 9 lascannons = 330pts, again with T3, not scoring, 2 more killpts and without tankhunters. The one bonus guard get in this comparison, is the ability to split fire, hardly canceled out by all the bonuses squats get in comparison.

A suggestion is to redo this unit to be like a devastator unit, with weaponprices taken from IG support squads, but to keep them as troops. This way, they are good, but not hideously overpowered.

Same problems with the assault squad, they have way to cheap weapons, when you stash so many weapons in one squad, they should be more expensive, as their efficiency increases exponentially.

I understand that it is possible to build nice, balanced lists with the current rules, but it is also possible to build stupidly cheesy armies, and that is the problem I see with this otherwise great codex.   

Sry if I sound harsh, not trying to bring down your work, I like it a lot, but I would like to see it more balanced, so trying to give some input on what I react negatively to. 
If there were no God, it would be necessary to invent him - Voltare

Offline Rasmus

  • The Ratcatcher
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33046
  • Country: 00
  • Lost Roads are now found!
    • 40kOnline
  • Armies: Squats
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #45 on: February 14, 2009, 01:16:03 PM »
After some more playtesting I have now compiled 1.23. Not a lot of major changes, some to the power of the Mole Mortar, which is now a bit more in line with its price, and a bit more random.
This version also includes pictures for the armylist itself, with a picture for more units.

Lost Roads - finally released!


YouTube-clip of my Squat army.

Offline Frowny

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 138
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #46 on: May 18, 2009, 02:12:55 AM »
Firstly, I really like it overall, awesome ideas and execution. I like the guild idea/layout and the fluff/logic behind the organization.

I really like brotherhood in arms. Well done.

I really like the idea of being slow, and fat of foot is a great idea, but I think the slowness should be represented in their normal movement. As is, they would never bother running anyway, as they have such great guns, and move just like imperial guard. With squats, I would actual make them slower in the normal phase, so they have an incentive to run. I love the idea of squats waddling/running across the field as its the only way for them to get to an objective. Strangely, I also don't feel like the squats are slow enough and feel slow and purposeful fits better, as long as it doesn't give additional assault bonuses (not sure). with transports, they are just as fast as any other army, which seems out of character.

40k seems to have done away with any kind of slower lists which is sad, as it can be occasionally fun to play as long as its not too plentiful or powerful.

So, the trikes you have are for all intents and purposes the same as space marine attack bikes, but you get -1save -1 bs and -21 points and some wicked weapon options...5pt plasmacannons with no overheating? Yes you lose some useless stats (ws, str, I) but bikes don't work well in CC anyway and thats a lot of points. Marine attack bikes are already really good. I understand the idea of dwarves on bikes, but seems a bit powerful, especially with all the other heavy weapons you can already load up on... Some points hike on the other bikes might be needed a bit too?
maybe I'm missing something?

The assault and support squads feel like they have too many special/heavy weapons, especially considering they are troops. I know they are limited by brotherhood squads, but those are quite decent themselves. 5 special weapons on the assault squad seems very powerful. as do the huge numbers of heavies in the support squads.

The brotherhood weaponsteams should probably be deployed together, as is the case for heavy weapons teams in most other codices. It is a big advantage dividing them up. Missel launchers should probably not cost more then plasma or las cannons, as both seem signifcantly better.

Why bother with the rapier laser destroyer? Its quite powerful and doesn't seem overbalanced, but doesn't seem to add much to the list and creating new weapons in a fan-list isn't necessarily good unless they add something cool and new.

The other thing I consider when I think of squats is armored mining walkers adapted for war. I was thinking along the lines of a troop choice, open topped AV9-9-8 walker? It would certainly make them feel different, and actually isn't any tougher then a terminator (way less tough vs heavy bolters for example). I think thats how I would make my squats... Very slow, hit hard, and quite armored. Lots of walkers, but objective missions mean they have to move their troops at targets instead of drive by shooting like every other army out there. Maybe even an assault walker/ slow assault tank. Lumbering behemoth transport anyone? I  might even give them short ranged weapons so they have a reason to move at the enemy

 I was actually considering trying to come up with a list, but yours is so well organized, formed and thoughtful... May I use some of your ideas if I do?

Offline Rasmus

  • The Ratcatcher
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33046
  • Country: 00
  • Lost Roads are now found!
    • 40kOnline
  • Armies: Squats
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #47 on: September 27, 2009, 06:43:17 PM »
I had loads of time on my hands, so I reformatted the entire thing into the standard for options in the units and characters. Made the codex 2 pages longer, but looks a bit cleaner.

Edit: I reorganized the codex a bit, makes it abit easier to find stuff in.
« Last Edit: November 6, 2009, 08:43:53 PM by Ardeth Bey »

Lost Roads - finally released!


YouTube-clip of my Squat army.

Offline Exoarmor

  • Newest
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #48 on: March 7, 2010, 04:34:28 AM »
Sorry for the threadomancy here, but I've been wrestling with the creation of a Squat 'dex for awhile, and whether or not to make one at all or simply use this one. As I consider this to be the CLOSEST list available to how the Squats both were and should still be, I'd prefer to use this list, and am replying in the hopes that you'll take some of my suggestions to mind, maybe make a tweak to the list here and there (mainly cosmetic/nothing that hasn't been said before), and leave everyone in the history of the universe satisfied... ;)

First, the section headings are a bit... stark, I guess against the white of the page. Maybe try... a different font? Not bold? I don't really have a big suggestion for this one, it's just a bit of a strain on the eyes.

Second: no Ogryn?! Surly we need these brusiers for a counter-attack unit! Along with Ratlings Ogryn these were the go-to abhumans for the Squats. In the new Guard 'dex they're actually borderline usable, and I think they should definitely be considered for this codex.

Next-and this is my biggest.. I guess you could say gripe with your codex- the rules for some of the weapons in the support battery (weapons teams)! There exist 'official' rules for the Thudd gun, Tarantula and Rapier (as of 4th at least for the Rapier). I'd really like to see them replace the current rules in the 'dex. Not saying these rules aren't good; just saying that as long as we have 'official' rules to go off of we might as well us 'em. Only change I'D suggest is to make 'em usable like the Krieg list: 1-4 as Elite, including the Rapier 8)

Next are a few (VERY few!) naming issues. PLEASE consider renaming the 'Support Squad' Thunderers!!! As much as I like to see 'official' rules in this great 'dex for those above-mentioned weapons, I'd REALLY like to see these guys get their names... well, I guess I'd say back! The terms 'Thanehand' and 'Kinghand' I don't recall from fluff but that's ok; and I can do without the distinction between Living Ancestor and Spirit Master/Ancestor Lord; and I don't really like the sound of either Berserkers or Cyberslayers... but could you consider changing 'Veteran Advisors' to 'Ironbreakers?' It seems to be similar to the corresponding unit in Epic, and I think it has much more of a flavour to it then just... well... advisors who are veterans. Maybe???

Finally, you've heard it before, I know, but maybe tone-down the Supportsquad/Thunderers just a tinny bit? I remember them in RT days (yes, I'd like a whole squad of heavy bolters w/suspensors...), but I think a squad a bit more in line with Devastators would be better in the metagame.

I know this was quite the post, but think about some of my suggestions: I've got a pretty sizable army of classic Squats under construction right now, and I'd love to give my FLGS this 'dex and say 'This is THE best, MOST ideal 'dex to use,' and throw down! :D

What do you think, mate? (If you want any help, too, I'm always more then happy to support the Strongholds!)
« Last Edit: March 7, 2010, 04:42:12 AM by Exoarmor »

Offline Rasmus

  • The Ratcatcher
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33046
  • Country: 00
  • Lost Roads are now found!
    • 40kOnline
  • Armies: Squats
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #49 on: March 7, 2010, 05:44:26 AM »
Sorry for the threadomancy here, but I've been wrestling with the creation of a Squat 'dex for awhile, and whether or not to make one at all or simply use this one. As I consider this to be the CLOSEST list available to how the Squats both were and should still be, I'd prefer to use this list, and am replying in the hopes that you'll take some of my suggestions to mind, maybe make a tweak to the list here and there (mainly cosmetic/nothing that hasn't been said before), and leave everyone in the history of the universe satisfied... ;)
You can never please everyone, but I am glad you enjoy the work up to this point.

Quote
First, the section headings are a bit... stark, I guess against the white of the page. Maybe try... a different font? Not bold? I don't really have a big suggestion for this one, it's just a bit of a strain on the eyes.
It looks even weirder in print than on the screen, but it was the only typeface I could find that fit the bill. I will go look again, see if I can find something more fitting.

Quote
Second: no Ogryn?! Surly we need these brusiers for a counter-attack unit! Along with Ratlings Ogryn these were the go-to abhumans for the Squats. In the new Guard 'dex they're actually borderline usable, and I think they should definitely be considered for this codex.
The problem is that they were not in the old Squat list, only the ratlings were. This list has been about trying for the feel and contents of the old RT-list, not invent a 5th ed Squat list from scratch.

Quote
Next-and this is my biggest.. I guess you could say gripe with your codex- the rules for some of the weapons in the support battery (weapons teams)! There exist 'official' rules for the Thudd gun, Tarantula and Rapier (as of 4th at least for the Rapier). I'd really like to see them replace the current rules in the 'dex. Not saying these rules aren't good; just saying that as long as we have 'official' rules to go off of we might as well us 'em. Only change I'D suggest is to make 'em usable like the Krieg list: 1-4 as Elite, including the Rapier 8)
When I started writing this there weren't any such rules, but I can look into it.
Thudd gun (quad-launcher) is worth looking into, the Tarantula is a sentrygun only at this point, and I cannot find the Rapier anywhere. What publication is it in? I have loads of these books, and I cannot find it anywhere now. I know I have seen it but now it escapes me

Quote
Next are a few (VERY few!) naming issues. PLEASE consider renaming the 'Support Squad' Thunderers!!! As much as I like to see 'official' rules in this great 'dex for those above-mentioned weapons, I'd REALLY like to see these guys get their names... well, I guess I'd say back! The terms 'Thanehand' and 'Kinghand' I don't recall from fluff but that's ok; and I can do without the distinction between Living Ancestor and Spirit Master/Ancestor Lord; and I don't really like the sound of either Berserkers or Cyberslayers... but could you consider changing 'Veteran Advisors' to 'Ironbreakers?' It seems to be similar to the corresponding unit in Epic, and I think it has much more of a flavour to it then just... well... advisors who are veterans. Maybe???
Now here's the thing. A LOT of fan-made lists for the Squats have fallen prey for this – going fantasy. I know it sounds “cool” to have 'Thunderers', and 'Ironbreakers' in your army, but then you should play FB Dwarves. The squats got scrapped because they were too closely knit to their fantasy counterparts, it was their fatal flaw.
And you are not playing FB Dwarves, you are playing Squats. They are not supposed to be FB Dwarves, with runes, Ironbreakers or Gyrocopters; they are supposed to be Squats, with Living Ancestors, Thudd guns and landtrains.
It would be just as silly to lobby for the Imperial Guard to get back Pistoleres as a name for their mounted shooters, or hochland riflemen for their weaponteams. They aren't Empire, neither are the Craftworld Jetbikers Dragon princes, the ork psykers Shamen, or the Chaos Cultists Marauders. The less of a link there is between the two the better.
Now of course, you can call them whatever you want – just strike out the name and put yours in, it does not impede their performance one bit, if you want to have the Squats be FB Dwarves. Personally I don't.

Now the Veteran Advisors. There used to be a command sqad for the Living Ancestors, but it was a bit garbled, and hard to 'translate' into 5th ed, so the progression of Brotherhood member, Brotherhood Veteran, Veteran Advisor suggested itself. It fit into the context fairly well, and people 'get' what they are supposed to be without going “What do you mean 'Ironbreaker'?” or whatever name I picked. “Veteran Advisor” tells what they are.

Quote
Finally, you've heard it before, I know, but maybe tone-down the Supportsquad/Thunderers just a tinny bit? I remember them in RT days (yes, I'd like a whole squad of heavy bolters w/suspensors...), but I think a squad a bit more in line with Devastators would be better in the metagame.
I have done this in testing quite a bit, and it does not add up at all. Whenever I tinker with squadsize, loadout options or points the unit performs way below what it is supposed to. The only way I have seen to make them balanced is to make them 5-man heavy weapons with no Combat squad prerequisite, neatly wrecking the fluff behind the Brotherhood, and cascading into the Assault squads. It gets messy, suffice to say.

Quote
I know this was quite the post, but think about some of my suggestions: I've got a pretty sizable army of classic Squats under construction right now, and I'd love to give my FLGS this 'dex and say 'This is THE best, MOST ideal 'dex to use,' and throw down! :D
I am happy you enjoy the work that we have done so far, and that you can use the dex. I will look into some of this stuff and see what can be done about it.
« Last Edit: March 7, 2010, 07:08:42 AM by Rasmus »

Lost Roads - finally released!


YouTube-clip of my Squat army.

Offline Exoarmor

  • Newest
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #50 on: March 7, 2010, 02:18:56 PM »
Thank you for the in-depth reply; it's appreciated.

The rules for the Rapier were carried over into 3rd in Citadel Journal #43, and then updated by George Spiggott. PM me for more info if you're still having trouble locating them; I have all the other rules as well.

As far as some of the naming convensions: I realize that Squats started out as Dwarves... IN SPAAAAAAACE! and that image has to one degree or another been shied away from. I LIKE the fact it has been shied away from! I don't play WFB Dwarves, no do I have any plans to, but I do have a few thousand points (and growing... ;D) of Squats, and I wanna play them. Thunderers as heavy weapons have been around since the early days of 2nd at least, and I believe even the compendium before that. You're right that I can give any name I want for my own happiness; that's cool, too. I was just thinking that Thunderer-100%canon-would still sound Squat-like without too much of a WFB taste carrying over.

Ogryn weren't in the RT build?! Really? Were they in the LBB? I, sadly, don't have either the old RT book nor all but about 10% on the 2nd edition box/Dark Millennium, so all I have to go off of is memory :P I seemed to recall them being available in the 2nd ed list... but as this is an update of the RT list there's bound to be some discrepancy between the two.

Sorry for the ramble here, but trust me: I'm just excited to be able to actually field my old Squats again in a manner I feel suits them well, and that's made possible by you. Savvy? ;)

Offline Rasmus

  • The Ratcatcher
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33046
  • Country: 00
  • Lost Roads are now found!
    • 40kOnline
  • Armies: Squats
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #51 on: March 7, 2010, 03:14:25 PM »
To be honest rules for 3rd ed in a non-canon source (like CJ) isn't really a big whoop. Rules have changed too much since then, and playtesting on the Rapier has proven that it works and is balanced for its lot. So I think that will stick around. I will look into the Thuddgun, but the quad launcher was WAY more powerful than the current Thuddgun, so it would have to be toned down or it would cost a bunch with extra cream on.

As for the old RT-list I will have to get my old copy out of storage, but I might as well go do that since I am heading down to the basement anyway, and see what we can do about it.

And don't volunteer to share copyright-protected information. It is not cool.

Lost Roads - finally released!


YouTube-clip of my Squat army.

Offline croggy

  • Loota
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 585
  • Country: gb
  • ...to burn or not to burn...
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #52 on: March 10, 2010, 09:05:06 PM »
nice work its nice to see the squats in all their glory

Offline Rasmus

  • The Ratcatcher
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33046
  • Country: 00
  • Lost Roads are now found!
    • 40kOnline
  • Armies: Squats
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #53 on: March 12, 2010, 01:33:11 AM »
After looking over the quadlauncher and running some numbers I have decided to retest it. I am also doing yet another overhaul of the layout to bring it more in line with the current GW trend, and replacing the typeface for easier printing. However, I have not had time to complete this (1.30) yet. Hopefully I will be able to during next week.

Lost Roads - finally released!


YouTube-clip of my Squat army.

Offline croggy

  • Loota
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 585
  • Country: gb
  • ...to burn or not to burn...
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #54 on: March 13, 2010, 12:19:42 AM »
if you are changing the type then bolder would be great for me as i have bad eyes and struggle with all dem fancy thin types

thanks lol

Offline Rasmus

  • The Ratcatcher
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33046
  • Country: 00
  • Lost Roads are now found!
    • 40kOnline
  • Armies: Squats
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #55 on: March 13, 2010, 05:41:55 AM »
The main text will be the same, it is only the header and some of the formatting in the posts themselves that will be changed.
The font this is written in is not supposed to be read online, there are far better typefaces for that. This is for ease of reading when you have it printed.

Lost Roads - finally released!


YouTube-clip of my Squat army.

Offline croggy

  • Loota
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 585
  • Country: gb
  • ...to burn or not to burn...
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #56 on: March 13, 2010, 11:49:21 PM »
i realised that after i printed it lol

its not that bad once onto paper lol

and in all fairness once i mested with my view settings a little it was not to bad on the monitor either lol

so er yeah ignore me

Offline Rasmus

  • The Ratcatcher
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33046
  • Country: 00
  • Lost Roads are now found!
    • 40kOnline
  • Armies: Squats
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #57 on: March 14, 2010, 06:02:52 AM »
That's ok. I know how different things look on a screen then when printed. A lot of online resources don't take this into consideration, but this codex does, at least.

I am going to be swamped this week, but I will try to get the update done before the weekend, and upload it.

Right, preview of 1.30 is up.
Loads of details are still to get done, but the major remake is of course that the armylist has gotten a reconstruct. What do you think?
« Last Edit: March 17, 2010, 05:14:34 PM by Rasmus »

Lost Roads - finally released!


YouTube-clip of my Squat army.

Offline Mabrothrax

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 68
  • Don't let the 'newbie' tag fool you
    • www.freewebs.com/malal-lives.com
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #58 on: March 17, 2010, 07:54:13 PM »
After a quick glance I have to say that the whole pdf looks alot smoother and easier to read, wil have to compare it to the previous version for a better critique.

Having recently acquired a fairly substantial number of squats, I shall be putting the list throught its paces in due course (expect to see a blog/project og thread soon).

One thing that has troubled me for a while is the Living Ancestor's bike/sidecar rule - it doesn't read very well and fees like a convoluted throwback to earlier rules systems.

Might a simpler approach be to say that the bike/sidecar is for all intents and purposes a bike upgrade that offers a further +1W to represent the bike rider? I'm thinking that something like the daemonic mounts/chariots from the chaos daemons chaos space marine codices would be a good parallel.

Also; Exo-armour - would not the option for further uprades of the power weapon (to a T Hammer or P Fist) and stormbolter (to combi weapon etc) be apt? I have a vague memory of the a description of exo-armour suggesting that wealthy squats would upgrade it to have heavier weaponry.

Keep up the good work.

Offline Rasmus

  • The Ratcatcher
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 33046
  • Country: 00
  • Lost Roads are now found!
    • 40kOnline
  • Armies: Squats
Re: Squats RT-list for 5th Ed
« Reply #59 on: March 18, 2010, 04:38:01 AM »
After a quick glance I have to say that the whole pdf looks alot smoother and easier to read, wil have to compare it to the previous version for a better critique.
Yeah, there is a lot of work still to be made to the layout, but just redoing the armylist was enough for now. It took ages to get the program to do it the way I wanted.

Quote
Having recently acquired a fairly substantial number of squats, I shall be putting the list throught its paces in due course (expect to see a blog/project og thread soon).
Looking forward to seeing your reports.

Quote
One thing that has troubled me for a while is the Living Ancestor's bike/sidecar rule - it doesn't read very well and fees like a convoluted throwback to earlier rules systems.
it is one of those things that hasn't been playtested that well yet. I will look into it. Thanks for bringing it (back) to my attention.

Quote
Also; Exo-armour - would not the option for further uprades of the power weapon (to a T Hammer or P Fist) and stormbolter (to combi weapon etc) be apt? I have a vague memory of the a description of exo-armour suggesting that wealthy squats would upgrade it to have heavier weaponry.
There were never any models made with anything else, it seems the bike was the upgrade-path of choice for the wealthier hearthguards. Possibly the King/thanehand could use a powerfist or something, but at +1S as they are it really looks a bit odd.

Lost Roads - finally released!


YouTube-clip of my Squat army.

 


Powered by EzPortal