The Commander Series Forum

As I mentioned in my "How do they compare?" thread over in the FWC Discussion forum I am looking at FWC as a replacement for the Epic system. But, I wanted to test the system out to see if it still had that Epic 40k feel to it. So, I have been cobbling together some list using BKCII/CWC to run some test games and just wanted to make sure the lists looked alright for that purpose. I probably will be getting FWC, but I want to make sure it is a fit to what I am looking for as I have too many rules sets as is.

Constructive comment welcome
Troop Arm Move AT AP CA Hits Save
Tactical Inf 10 4:10 4:30 3 4 6
Devastator Inf 10 5:10 4:30 4 4 6
Assault Inf 20 - 4:10 8 4 6
Terminators Inf 10 5:30 5:30 5 5 5
Dreads Inf 10 * * 5 6 5
Bikes Inf 20 2:30 4 4 6
Rhino IFV 30 - 2:30 3 5 4
L. Speeder Inf 30 3:80 3:80 3 3 -
L. Raid Arm 20 5:1003:1004 6 4
Vindicator Arm 20 6:20 6:1003 5 4
Whirlwind Arm 30 8:40 8:1003 5 4
Hunter Arm 30 5:40 5:2003 5 4
Pred-A Arm 30 5:80 - 3 5 4
Pred-D Arm 30 - 3:80 3 5 4
T. Hawk A/C 30 6:1003:80 - 5 4

Look good enough to run an effective test? This is just bare bones, I haven't added in the special notes, yet. May also have notice no CO or HQ; this is because according to the fluff the Commanders of most of the armies in 40k dust it up with the troops so I will be using the Regular units as COs rule from BKCII.

Ok, fire when ready.

Well, that formatted better then I thought it would.

There are some Epic lists in the book.

IanS

"There are some Epic lists in the book."

Yes, and one of them is an SM list, I am aware. But, what I am attempting to do is run a few test plays to see if the system fits the Epic universe to my liking before I purchase it. So, I do not have access to the lists in the book and had to make do with what I have available for those test plays. I did not think it appropriate to ask for someone to type out the SM, Guard, Ork lists for me on the forum.

To be 100% honest, I am reluctant to spend $40+CDN for only 4 lists. I don't do very much sci-fi gaming so I am being a little more picky about the possible purchase of FWC as I won't get the same milage out if it as I do BKCII and CWC.

It wouldn't take too long to put together a couple of 2,000pt matched-pair list for SM v Scavengers. That would give you a feel and at 2,000pts a reasonably managable game.

I'm happty to do them for you if you like - got plenty of time on my hands just now - in between painting Aztecs/Ottoman Turks/Red Guard/Star Wars Imperial stuff etc.etc.etc.

Let me know what troop types you most deffinately want included & I'll have a go. I have a pre-prepared Scavenger Fast-Attack army list at 2,000pts already (loads of bikes, half-tracks & buggies).

Thanks for the offer. Not sure on the points count for the SM forces, for what I have planned will be using pretty much everything I have listed above, plus a maniple of Titans (2 W. Hounds and 1 Reaver) and Naval Air support fighters and a Marauder-D.

I am not sure exactly what the point value for the Scavengers would be either, but Nobs, Boys, Stormboys, Gunwagons, Scorchers, Battle/Gun Forts, Cans/Dreads, Big Guns, 1 Gargant and Bomber support would all be represented.

Will have a go
We can refine it as you go on with the test

Hi

I might be able to front a 2000 pt SM army, all in the name of Science, you understand!

Thanks
Paul H
PS Or 2000pts Squats, or Eldar, or Imperial Guards......

Well, using the Epic points system I can field 5050 pts worth of Space Wolves units (as above), that also includes 1 Maniple of Titans (2 W. Hounds and 1 Reaver) and 2 T. Bolts and 1 Marauder-D courtesy of the Imperial Navy.

On the Orky side of things I can field a 2580pt Warhoard, including Gargant and fighter/Bomber air support.

Not, sure what that works out to in FWC, but must be pretty close to 2000 pts a side.

Well my 2c worth are :

1)"May also have notice no CO or HQ; this is because according to the fluff the Commanders of most of the armies in 40k dust it up with the troops", while this may give you another combat stand, it does leave your commanders horribly vunerable. In FWC, command stands cannot be DIRECTLY targeted, they can still die if arty "accidentally" stomps them though.

2) Whirlwinds, like most arty units dont need that much of a profile as theyre off table somewhere, drinking coffee and eating bacon butties waiting for your FAO to call their fire in.

3) Devastators have a longer range than youve got them shooting, Land Raiders have a shorter range.

4) Playing Marines is pretty horrible really as you dont even start getting close to a "balanced" all-arms force until about the 6000pts mark. And thats with just a single Hound. So at that sort of numbers all the lesser races have just a horrendous amount of stuff on the table, on the up-side, it does produce "target-rich-environments".

Just for a larf, here's the pitiful amount that you can squeeze out of 2000pts

1 CO (CV10) Command 60 F 3/30 - 6 6 160 [160]
2 HQ (CV9) Command 40 F 2/30 - 4 6 90 [180]
6 Infantry Unit (Regular Marines) Infantry 10 F 4/30 4 4 L 5 55 [330] #1
2 Infantry Upgrade (Devastator) Infantry - 2/100H - - - 45 [90]
3 IFV Unit (M50 'Bad Dawg') Armour 30 T 2/40* 3 4 5 40 [120] #2
4 IFV Unit (M1 'Big Mama' Assault Vehicle) Armour 25 T 4/60 4 6 4 T 165 [660] #3 R/S1
1 Walker Unit (M1A5 'Coyote') Armour 30 F 6/60 6 6 M/S 4 460 [460] #4 R/S1

"it does leave your commanders horribly vunerable. In FWC, command stands cannot be DIRECTLY targeted..."

Such is life in the far future combat zone. The current Command paradigm works well for BKC/CWC as most commanders are in the rear with the gear to some extent. I feel the "Regular Unit Commander" would reflect C&C a little better in Epic.

2:100 for Devastators!? The only difference between a SM Tac Squad and a Devastator Squad is one less Bolter and one more Missle launcher, why the drastic jump in stats?

"I feel the "Regular Unit Commander" would reflect C&C a little better in Epic."

To qualify this is one big experiment. Implementation may change my mind.

Also, I am looking at Whirlwinds as an Artillery Support weapon as per BKCII.

I have just put together a 2000 pt force of space marines for FWC, a pic can be seen here, at the bottom of the page.

http://yorkie.6sided.net/my-armies/

A quick rundown of what is in there -

CO
HQ
FAO
Scouts X2
Snipers X2
Tac marines X6 - 3 Rhino
Support Marines X3 - 3 Rhino
Assault Marines X4
Terminators X2

I think its a reasonably balanced force, although i will be adding to it with some more vehicles in the future.

Steve

2:100 for Devastators!? The only difference between a SM Tac Squad and a Devastator Squad is one less Bolter and one more Missle launcher, why the drastic jump in stats?

Devastators, ie support marines have a secondary weapon system in FWC,-

Secondary Weapon System: 4/100H attacks against all relevant targets (Missile Launchers)

What you must also bear in mind is the extra rules for marines, ie

Tactical Doctrine
Flexible tactical doctrine (25cm initiative distance)

Special Rules

Tech Level: Contemporary
Air Superiority: +2 modifier to die roll

Fearless: Deduct one die when rolling for suppression and fall-back (accumulative, so elite units deduct two dice)

Most SM units are elite, so this means they will deduct 2 dice when rolling for fall back and suppression, so marine infantry is rock hard and difficult to kill.

Hope this sheds a bit more light....or confuses matters even more....

Nice work all around, particularly the Spartans and the ER. A good job on the Novamarines as well. However, filing the Aquilas off the Capitol Imperialis (lucky sod) is blasphemy!

I agree with every rule you posted above, though not exactly sure how TL plays into the game, but a range of 100cm for the Dev Squad seems excessive to me. They are only infantry carried rocket launchers.

That is a solid force of Novamarines you have listed above; you pretty much have a standard Battle Company. How do the Termies get around? Deep Strike (teleport)?

Teleport

I have also just won an evil bay bid on some land speeders, so the army is not as finished as i thought it was.....

As for TL, im not too sure either if im honest, i left my rulebook in the UK, silly i know. Maybe someone else could remind us

Steve

Right, Tech level affects the radius of artillery etc and the amount by which it deviates IIRC.....

Steve

If you just want to try the lists out to get the feel for the system compared to Epic why not do a couple of sammple 2000 point armies using the Battlegroups selection system on the site which Pete is good enough to provide for free.

"...why not do a couple of sammple 2000 point armies using the Battlegroups selection system on the site which Pete is good enough to provide for free."

A very good idea, only I just tried the Battlegroups section and I only seem to have access to the BKC lists.

You need to pay Pete an upgrade to get access to BKC as well.
I'll work on a couple of 2,000pt sampler lists for you & post later today.

Click on the drop down menu on the first screen asking about the rule system being used, it gives you options for BKC I and II, CWC and FWC, or at least it does when I used it.

The default is BKC II I believe. Paying Pete for additional access gets you the ability to generate larger battlegroups, the basic free option limits you to 2000 points, and you can also choose to ignore some of the standard limits on unit selection and the random modifier.

The click down list only gives me the BKC option.

Yep, i think you may need to message Pete and ask him if he will give you access to the FWC lists.

Ive only got access to BKC, BKCII, and FWC, because i dont own CWC...yet.

Steve