Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


c0rruptd last won the day on January 30 2016

c0rruptd had the most liked content!

About c0rruptd

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

2,526 profile views
  1. Just wanted to point out: not every Danish vet. Never taken a Danish Emperor in my life, and don't take many Fafnirs. Need those points for Korsors and Sigurds, after all...
  2. We are back to 'But I want to take an Emperor AND other Non-core', but in the context of a small points game... I can't take more than 400 points of Smalls in 1000 points either, and I feel that that is severally restricting how I play some of my fleets. But I also don't think it should be changed so I can take unlimited smalls, as hilarious as that would be... And it's not really that ridiculous. You aren't forced to take any Lend-Lease, and they aren't pivotal to the play style or strength of the Danes. They are simply nice additions that can alter your fleet if you want. They shouldn't be used as a crutch or as the core of the faction, like people seem to want the Emperor to be... My approach is always to ignore Lend-Lease unless I have a very specific job for them that I feel the sacrifice is worth it for. The Emperor has never been on my radar for this reason, as I just use a Ragnorak or recently an Asgard. But stuff like 'hey, lets try a battlecruiser in Advanced deployment for fun' is exactly what I see Lend-Lease for. They aren't supposed to be the backbone of your fleet, that's what the actual Danish models are for. Oh, and I'm not shrugging and saying 'It's a minor nation, who cares...?' at all. This is a minor nation and it will have less options, that's how the minor nations work. The Core7 are the ones with nearly every option for playstyle under the sun, while the minor nations are much more about taking a specific playstyle to it's extreme...
  3. I'm more curious about what sort of lists people are running that requires MORE than 40% Non-core...? I have never hit that limit, unless I'm running one of my Danish SAS Lists of Doom, and that's just because I pack out the Aerial component with Fafnirs. A lot of the arguments seem to focus around the fact people can't take the Emperor as their Commodores vessel as well as a massive amount of Aerial models... The thing is, you can run an Emperor as your Commodores vessel, but it will impact your list if you do. You're trading Aerial flexibility for a 'tougher' Commodore. You can max out your Aerial models instead, but it will have to consider what you are doing with your Commodore then. It's no different from the other list building restrictions like 40% smalls, or non-Naval elements being non-Core in Naval games. I often want to run way more smalls than that, but I can't because that'd be weird (if completely awesome...) and wouldn't it be such fun saying 'Naval' then bringing pure Aerial to the table...? So again, I see no issues with the Lend-Lease being non-Core. It's flavourful, it leverages a rule we already have rather than adding more, it adds options to the Danish list, but it will cause you to actually have to make sacrifices if you want to use them to tailor your force or cover a weakness, as opposed to cherry picking units from the Danish and Prussian ORBAT to create a decidedly non-Danish list... I would like to see more Danish units though, such as another small, an Aerial large, another Aerial medium maybe and possibly a Tender or something so we can bring more of the Tyr's... But Lend-Lease should remain as a nice way to add flavour to your force, not a central pillar to build lists around.
  4. I've personally never really used the Lend-Lease models (other than some Wachters and Stolz's), and I'm the only local player with Danes. However, there seems to be a massive issue here with people complaining about lend-lease as it stands, apparently because they can't fit Aerial models and Prussian models into the 40% of their force that is available for this. So I do support the rules as they stand. I've never had issues with playing my Danes to the point I felt the need to pack my list with Prussian models, and I've found there is plenty of variety in lists you can build, even with the Danes narrow focus on tactics. So to answer your question with another question: why do the Danes need to be able to build lists using Prussian models as Core units?
  5. I think all that needs to change is a caveat that Lend-Lease models may not be taken as Allied vessels, to stop the Prussians taking Prussian 2.0 models as Allies. @Grey Mage: I never said remove them entirely, as I like having them around as an option. But they shouldn't dominate Danish list building... Rather, they are a nice 'ooo, I might take one ship from that list' type thing, instead of the 50% of my Danish force is now Prussian.
  6. I don't really have an issue with my Danes not having access to Prussian gear, as I feel the same as Sebenko that minor factions are exactly that, minor. They have a more limited and specialised set of tactics, but are generally way better at them than the Core7. Keeping the Prussian gear as non-core is simple from a rules perspective, fits the background of these being rare spares the Prussians have been able to provide, and ensures we don't see a Prussia 2.0 appear instead of the Danes. Plus it might mean we have to see more of a Danish expansion if there are obvious holes in the ORBAT (a second naval small, for instance... )
  7. I'm actually scratching my head as to why I'd take Secutors anymore... The Velites simply seem like they bring what a Secutor does, but with more pure AD and for cheaper...? All it sacrifices is some manoeuvrability, mines and a point of PD and AP... What am I missing here?
  8. I still haven't seen a single good reason to remove the Metzger from the Prussian ORBATs. It makes no sense, and would simply act to really annoy and upset people that have always had a Metzger as part of their Prussians. And as Sebenko pointed out: Allies are not part of the core rules, they are optional. That's on top of the requirement to take a 'tax' of units you might not want to take, simply so you can take a model you used to always be able to, but now can't because... reasons? On the plasma idea, that just sounds like a Super-heavy Flamethrower that is also normal Ordnance (so no downsides...). I think it'd be better to go in a far different direction and have something that can link with tesla/speerschleuder and benefits from harpoons. Kepp their tech on the same path, rather than veering wildly into other nations areas.
  9. Removing a unit from a faction that it has had since the game started is a huge no-no, especially considering it is one of the most iconic ones in the game. Not to mention it's the model that got a lot of people into playing Prussia... To then go 'You know what? That model that you love in the faction you started because of it? Not that faction anymore! Sorry! Guess you'll need to repaint it, and then buy some more models you might not like just to use it now!' So no, the Metzger should remain as a Prussian model first and foremost, even if that means removing it from the STO to 'make them different'. The Hochmeister obviously doesn't have that pedigree, but releasing it as a Prussian model, then less than a few months later changing it's designation would garner similar feelings. The nonsensical bit is stuff such as 'Oh, you just have to bring X unit extra now so you can bring the models you have always used before', for no real gameplay reason. It's not for balancing, its not for background, so I'm not sure what it really achieves beyond forcing people to buy and use extra models they didn't have to previously. You'd be far better off stripping the Metzger Ausf-A from the STO, and giving them their own set of variants with different options and weapons. More boardy (Metzger with close-combat weapons, for instance) and short range but much more brutal. The 'plasma' weapon sounds ok (seeing as lightning is a form of plasma anyways) but I'd drop the blast templates (especially the large). If plasma, corrosive makes a little sense, although Incendiary makes significantly more considering what plasma actually is... Either could work, although I'd definitely like to see it keep some resemblence to the tesla and Speerschleuder weapons, being an evolution or offshoot of that technology, rather than some completely random technology they just pulled out of a hat. On a more constructive note, I'd like to see another medium Robot, but significantly more offensive in nature than the Schildtrager. Maybe a speerschleuder or short-range but high-AD tesla arm, and then just a big armoured fist/sword/mace arm on the other side. Give them a tesla generator, and you're pretty much done. I'd also like to see perhaps a Medium airship squadron that can deploy Assault Infantry, kinda like a baby Ausfeher with baby Fausts... Maybe a speerschleuder turret if we want it to be equipped a little different for a Medium, but a tesla armament would be fine too.
  10. @Merlin: Sure, but Corrosive makes no sense as a Prussian/STO weapon. It's a French system, so it feels like it's shoe-horned in for no reason other than to be 'different'. I'm all for new weapons, but giving them a system from another unrelated nation isn't the way, and I personally don't have any ideas for a new weapon system that is similar to Tesla/Speerschleuders... I'm open to suggestions though. On the Hochmeister and Metzger being removed from the Prussian ORBAT: No. Simply no. The Metzger has always been a Prussian model from way back in the very early days of DW, even from before the STO was a concept... To then strip units out of a faction for no reason is not only inconsistent historically, it also makes no gameplay sense and would get a LOT of Prussian players offside. I would strongly oppose this change. As Farcages points out, the STO is pretty much a part of the Prussian Empire, much more so than Commonwealth nations are a part of Britain. And it seems the STO were so well behaved, the Empire even gave them a whole country to play in to their hearts content...
  11. On the new secondary weapon, what would it be? Also, tesla and speerschleuder's are more STO than Prussian, as the STO was responsible for their development if memory serves... I'm not that phased about Corrosive, and like the St Michael where it is. All that delicious lightning-harpoonery and the bucket o' generators make it a very different option from the Metzger. I agree having an Infantry Recke (full of Teutonic Armsmen? ) would be awesome, and would like the return of Jagers and Speerwurfs, again because the Speerwurf was initially developed by the STO. Not so sure about the Jager+Speerwurf unit though... I recall their being a reason it was removed... I'd also like to see Rugged Construction (1) as standard, and maybe the Specialised Defences (1 or 2) too. Terrifying on ALL models might be a bit excessive, but on stuff like the Infantry, Robots, and some other select models it might be a good idea. Maybe trade Specialised Defences for it...?
  12. So you are advocating for Leviathans that have no Leviathan CQB...? And that unless the CQB Leviathans have a really high stat there, are actually just as good at CQB as the dedicated close-combat Leviathans...? Yeh, no thanks. I'd like to see a weakness introduced to all Firepower Leviathans. Just make them awful at Leviathan CQB by forcing them to use their low LCQB stat if (and only if) they are being attacked by something also using it's LCQB stat. It simply represents the two giant robots grappling and dodging to try and do some damage. And the imagery is awesome. If something is in base-to-base but has no LCQB stat, it can still merrily shoot away with it's normal CQB.
  13. So then explain to me what the purpose of Leviathan CQB on an Odin is? As in your version, it has zero use, as you would always chose non-Leviathan CQB.
  14. If an Archangel is about to perform a few minor 'adjustments' to the Odin you are currently piloting using it's rather sharp blade, you probably have significantly more pressing issues on your mind than attempting to throw some minor small arms fire at it for the miniscule amount of time it's between 4" and 0"... So it should be forced to use it's Leviathan CQB if whatever is attacking it is using Leviathan CQB. On the stuff without a Leviathan CQB though, I think it would be fine to target that with normal CQB even if it's in base-to-base. Aside from ramming you, there isn't a whole lot it can do...
  15. Mine wasn't really knowledge, so much as how I would like it to be... It makes sense that if something is using Leviathan CQB against you, you have to use your own Leviathan CQB to defend... At least in my head...
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.