After a few games with Colossals

[Ranhothep]

I'd like to share some first impressions of Colossals performing on the tabletop with the community. I have played with them, played against them. Seen them dominate the game and also being brought down in 1 turn. They definitely are not game breaking, but game changing.

Dealing with them.
Everyone saying that you can ignore them and go for caster kill or scenario win clearly hasn't played against a colossal. Ignoring the biggest thing on the battlefield wouldn't make much sense in a battle, neither does it make in game. You simply can't. With one Colossal toe in the scenario zone or near a flag, you are suddenly one winning condition shorter. Armies who relied on maneuvring and tricks instead of brute force to achieve scenario wins won't cut it anymore. Armies who were able to deliver strong alpha strikes against key models will have trouble as well, since even the best "alpha strikers" usually don't have enough damage output to kill two heavies tucked into one. Colossals offer good protection to the various mechanics, which will certainly show up with them, so anything short of totalling the big guy won't have much effect at all. Good support casters will easily hide behind their big buddies and avoid assassination, so it all comes down to the point where your list needs to be able to kill the Colossal and be quick about it. Oh, no sh.. Sherlock!

Yes, yes Capt. Obvious strikes again, the thing however is, that not all high damage output armies will actually succeed at the task. Mainly those, that rely on infantry to do the damage. With quite a lot of aoe spam coming from the Colossals, single wound infantry really have no options here. This has been obvious since the first spoilers were hitting. Many people welcome the change and a shift away from infantrymachine armies. But what about those that still like their Irusks and Zaals and (insert your faction's infantryswarm caster here) I feel that for several of these casters the changing meta might be a bit too hard to stomach.

To sum it up, in order to avoid accusations of DOOOM! , Colossals fit very well with quite a lot of casters, so they will see regular play, however their impact on the meta might sideline some other casters quite significanlty. Would you guys agree?

[skarreslave2]

the stormwall has good anti infantry. conquest does little to high arm infantry, hyperion only truely punishes shieldwall, the judicator doesn't have anti infantry defense, the kraken gets 1 AOE against infantry so is very chargeable and the merc one also has no anti infantry suppression against melee. I've played against the stormwall half a dozen times now. It can suppress infantry and is pretty good at it but protecting all vectors to it from infantry is tough, especial against reach infantry. 2 grids is a lot of boxes but is still very killable.

[MagnustheJust]

It is becoming known that I am anti-120mm base. But I am not sitting at the inn, crying into my bourbon about " teh d00m !! ".

Instead, I am putting together a list that will drop a gargossal engine with minimal effort. Of course, this is how Mercenaries should be played, but that is besides the point.

Also, with the right incentive on the battle field, a gargossal engine will give Mags2 a rear arc charge. I'll just let that one sink in...

[Ranhothep]

I am not only talking about anti infantry defensive measures. I mean the amount of aoes flying your way on the way in. In which case the Judicator and Galleon have quite a lot to say.

Magnus, you underline my point, thank you. You are putting a list together with one colossal point in mind. Won't it mean that some of your older lists will be sidelined... completely?

Now, I know that with new books, new builds become available and usable, but so far new additions didn't make older lists extinct and Colossals just might do this to some infantrymachine lists, not just dampen them.

[Spyde]

Judicator has anti infantry defence.

Insert one of our amazing screen units here.. TFG, Zealots, Errants, Bastions...

[Lanz]

I agree with part of this, now that I've started facing them down myself. You need to be thinking about colossals now when you build lists. You need to have armor-cracking, and not just one of them. One isn't usually enough for a buffed colossal. You need debuffs and your own offensive buffs too, or at least two solid armor-cracking models.

One thing I realized in particular is that damaging a colossal is a fundamentally different reality from just two warjacks. If you fling armor-beaters at two warjacks, chances are you'll scrap one, and maybe damage the other, but a colossal is a very different reality. You could condense 20+ points worth of attackers and support to bringing one down, but if you fail, due to bad rolls or whatever, you're in some serious trouble. Not destroying the colossal after a full commitment is probably going to cost you the game. You'll be unlikely to recover from the retaliation, especially given that the player will have other stuff to bring to bear aside from the colossal. Models that may be untouched as you focused on a single model up to that point.

[MagnustheJust]

Magnus, you underline my point, thank you. You are putting a list together with one colossal point in mind. Won't it mean that some of your older lists will be sidelined... completely?

Over the past 7 years, I have only come up with two lists that I regularly use, and for a very simple reason - they work!! New options always change the game a bit, but I have seen a lot of the hoopla die down after a few months. Other than a ludicrous team tourney where three of the participating teams had 4 battle engines, I have not seen one hit the table since Temple Con...

So far, only one player in my area has bought a stormwall, and only because he thinks it will win him games by itself, because he keeps interpreting the rules on the card instead of reading them...

[PG_Nemlock]

You could condense 20+ points worth of attackers and support to bringing one down, but if you fail, due to bad rolls or whatever, you're in some serious trouble. Not destroying the colossal after a full commitment is probably going to cost you the game. You'll be unlikely to recover from the retaliation, especially given that the player will have other stuff to bring to bear aside from the colossal. Models that may be untouched as you focused on a single model up to that point.

Factoring in the cost value of mechanics, and how quickly they can undo your work if you left the thing alive with just a few hp's, it's gonna be a sad day in Mudville when that Colossal gets turned all the way back on and starts beating face. I'd be extremely surprised to not see at least 2 if not more mechanics in any list with a Colossal.

[Hasten]

They definitely are not game breaking, but game changing.

Seems like mission accomplished, then =). That's sort of what I hope for with every new book.

To sum it up, in order to avoid accusations of DOOOM! , Colossals fit very well with quite a lot of casters, so they will see regular play, however their impact on the meta might sideline some other casters quite significanlty. Would you guys agree?

Thanks for sharing your impressions so far! Speaking for Skorne, and specifically Zaal... hmmm, he's odd for an infantry caster, in that he really does want like half his army to die to fuel the other half during feat turn. My initial thought is that Feat + Last Stand + [X] should be a recipe for a wrecked [Y]. Hex Blast gives him a tool to remove some popular defensive spells, but given that you're putting Zaal that close to it, you'd better hope you're wrecking the Gargossal Engine (Yes, I support Magnus' nomenclature, though I feel it's enhanced by the shaking of a cane, and perhaps some additional complaints about "kids these days").

Regarding our other warlocks... hmmm, Skorne plays so well with Heavy warbeasts that it's hard to muster much d00m. Xerxis likely would be a good matchup with his affinity for massively-buffed Cetrati and a strong ability to concentrate tremendous damage on a portion of the battlefield. Almost everyone else is a combined arms warlock, so will probably be bringing at least a Gladiator + [other heavy warbeast], which should be enough armor cracking for most purposes. The only one I'm really hesitant about is Mordikaar. It'll be interesting to see how that ends up playing out, as he lacks strong damage enhancement, and generally likes a fair amount of infantry for Hollow, Revive, and Essence Blast. I suspect Mordikaar will probably need to be shifted a bit more beast-heavy in his list composition if Gargossal Engines are a concern. Happily, as mentioned, Skorne does that pretty well!

That's my two cents on my faction =).

-H

[PG_aterdaeus]

Just played in a tournament against another PG where I played a Colossal and he didn't. He straight up ignored it and the game was incredibly close. Ignoring it CAN be a good tactic in certain games.

[Loki77515]

Everyone saying that you can ignore them and go for caster kill or scenario win clearly hasn't played against a colossal.

I won via caster assassination against Bartolo and his Galleon without attacking the colossal once.

But, hey, what do I know right?

Good support casters will easily hide behind their big buddies and avoid assassination, so it all comes down to the point where your list needs to be able to kill the Colossal and be quick about it.

That may be true, but it isn't impossible to edge around the huge base to get LOS to the caster hiding behind the colossal.

I still think people are focusing a bit too much on killing colossals in one turn and aren't giving enough credit to the idea of maneuvering around them via SPD and DEF bonuses.

[Defenstrator]

So far, only one player in my area has bought a stormwall, and only because he thinks it will win him games by itself, because he keeps interpreting the rules on the card instead of reading them...

Certain ones are defintely seeing use. At Lock and Load masters I saw more than one list with Storm Striders and Vessels of Judgement, so some of them are seeing competative play.

I do wonder if colossals will result in less battle engines though. One of the big reasons to take one is that it couldn't get pushed or slammed out of a zone, and with a colossal able to do the same thing that ability isn't at a premium anymore.

I also think that colossals should have been restricted to 50 or 75 point games, because at lower points games the rock, paper, scissors feel becomes very strong. You either have a list that can deal with it, or you have a list that's strong enough at assassination that you can ignore it (and this can work as several of my opponents found out in speedmachine), or it grinds you down and kills you.

[Ranhothep]

I won via caster assassination against Bartolo and his Galleon without attacking the colossal once.

But, hey, what do I know right?


That may be true, but it isn't impossible to edge around the huge base to get LOS to the caster hiding behind the colossal.

I still think people are focusing a bit too much on killing colossals in one turn and aren't giving enough credit to the idea of maneuvering around them via SPD and DEF bonuses.

I apologize, I am thinking in a 50pt mindset, where apart from the Colossal, you still have enough points left to put in some infantry meatshield. In a 35pt game I can imagine, that going around the big base is an option, in 50 it gets tough imo.

Regarding Skorne, I don't fear any drastic changes myself. Hasten's assessment is quite spot on. Zaal should still have heavy hitters left after the infantry is gone, but then again the colossal isn't alone either

[Da-Rock]

If a Colossal is played right you shouldn't be able to ignore it. In the various games I have played its role changed each game. Sometimes a melee beast taking out this and that, a shooter blasting away at infantry and heavy units, an assassin when a well timed Trample can kill etc etc.

I have play tested a few scenarios just to see the results. I tried with denial tactics and reactive scenarios -

I wanted to see one of the best alpha strike tactics against the Stormwall and Darius - 1 Mauler and 1 EBDT, (Rage on both) using full 5 Fury = 55 damage. Darius pops Feat and repairs Stormwall, it kills Mauler and takes EBDT to within 4.

With both beast charging in another scenario they destroyed it, but it was never easy. It ALWAYS comes down to dice and you shouldn't listen to Math posters telling you the odds, because people who break down the odds are like politicians and lawyers.............. :-)

In every game I have played I have been able to limit what attacks my Colossal and I'm not even a good player. In tournaments it will be awesome to see good players on both sides jockeying for position with Colossals!

[Loki77515]

I apologize, I am thinking in a 50pt mindset, where apart from the Colossal, you still have enough points left to put in some infantry meatshield. In a 35pt game I can imagine, that going around the big base is an option, in 50 it gets tough imo.

The game I played was 50 points.

I was using Grim and though hiding Bart behind the Galleon would have been an alright move, it wouldn't have necessarily saved him in the long run. Grim's Lock the Target spell makes it so friendly models can draw LOS to the model hit regardless of what is in the way. This is what I'm talking about when I want people to think less about just trashing a colossal in one turn and more about getting around them. I really don't feel that getting around colossals is as hard as some, like yourself, are making it out to be.

[FearLord]

Everyone saying that you can ignore them and go for caster kill or scenario win clearly hasn't played against a colossal. Ignoring the biggest thing on the battlefield wouldn't make much sense in a battle, neither does it make in game. You simply can't. With one Colossal toe in the scenario zone or near a flag, you are suddenly one winning condition shorter.

While I agree that they make it harder to win most scenarios, there are some where multiple zones can be scored from which makes it harder to cover the board when playing with 18-20 pts of your army in one spot... In general though, I agree that as far as scenarios go, they will be hard to beat...

I don't agree with the point about not being able to ignore them - when you are concentrating so much of your army at one point, you cannot cover the field in the same way. This makes it harder to protect against everything your opponent can do. Not everything is capable of ignoring them, but there are lots of things that will happily ignore it and go for the throat...

[jandrese]

Those two zone scenarios are practically begging for Colossals. If you can park some gigantic monstrosity in one zone and have it shoot anything that comes near, you can have the remainder your army focus on the other zone. You don't have to worry about the other guy pulling out movement shenanigans on the less well defended zone to score a cheap point.

[MagnustheJust]

I also think that colossals should have been restricted to 50 or 75 point games, because at lower points games the rock, paper, scissors feel becomes very strong. You either have a list that can deal with it, or you have a list that's strong enough at assassination that you can ignore it (and this can work as several of my opponents found out in speedmachine), or it grinds you down and kills you.

I could not agree more with this assessment!! Using a gargossal at lower points is akin to the army using a main battle tank to scout over the next hill for the commandos...

More proof -

MacBain!!{+6}
~ Galleon - 12{18}
Eiryss2 - 3

Enjoy giggling while your opponent cries at having to completely destroy the gargossal, thanks to Fail Safe, to make it stop functioning in any kind of useful way. Meanwhile, Batgirl stops any buffs on the enemy...

[jandrese]

Warmachine is inherently broken at low point levels anyway though, Colossals don't really change that. What if instead of MacBain!!! it had been Darius with two Centurions and a Jr. Warcaster?

Heck, I think even the 35 point level is kind of broken. 50 points seems to be about the sweet spot for game balance. Maybe that weird 42 point level, I'm not sure, and to be fair I have not played many 75 point games so I don't have an especially good sense of how well the balance works at that level.

[FearLord]

Those two zone scenarios are practically begging for Colossals. If you can park some gigantic monstrosity in one zone and have it shoot anything that comes near, you can have the remainder your army focus on the other zone. You don't have to worry about the other guy pulling out movement shenanigans on the less well defended zone to score a cheap point.

That's great until your unsupported Colossal gets taken down by something on that flank... there are no hard and fast rules, but having a Colossal on the board concentrates part of the power in your force in an expensive model that cannot be everywhere at once.

A Colossal on the board does not mean that you have to kill it in order to win by scenario...

[PG_joedj]

I could not agree more with this assessment!! Using a gargossal at lower points is akin to the army using a main battle tank to scout over the next hill for the commandos...

More proof -

MacBain!!{+6}
~ Galleon - 12{18}
Eiryss2 - 3

Enjoy giggling while your opponent cries at having to completely destroy the gargossal, thanks to Fail Safe, to make it stop functioning in any kind of useful way. Meanwhile, Batgirl stops any buffs on the enemy...

Well, that's just rude! Especially since lower point games are the purvey of newer players.
Hopefully there won't be much of that, I'd hate to see newer players turned off by the 'brokeness' of the Colossals at low points...

[jandrese]

That's great until your unsupported Colossal gets taken down by something on that flank... there are no hard and fast rules, but having a Colossal on the board concentrates part of the power in your force in an expensive model that cannot be everywhere at once.

A Colossal on the board does not mean that you have to kill it in order to win by scenario...

True, but at least you can't just Slam it out of there or hit it with a 2-H throw or something like you could with a regular warjack.

[PG_joedj]

From viewing our venue's experiences with Colossals/Mountain King, it appears that these models can be demoralizing more than anything.

Warjacks/Warbeasts are routinely destroyed by lesser-costed infantry charges, usually weaponsmasters. This is less likely with a screened/protected Colossal, and the Colossal's return punch, though not gutting, is powerful enough to begin to limit the non-Colossal player's threats to the Colossal.

Demoralizing because what used to work, needs more cow-bell...

[Hasten]

Those two zone scenarios are practically begging for Colossals. If you can park some gigantic monstrosity in one zone and have it shoot anything that comes near, you can have the remainder your army focus on the other zone. You don't have to worry about the other guy pulling out movement shenanigans on the less well defended zone to score a cheap point.

Hmmmm, couldn't the same be said for a lot of other 20-ish point investments?

Say, an AFG + Hydra/Manticore/2x Stormfall (similarly difficult to shift via movement shenanigans), or maybe a Cannoneer + Full Venators + UA? That's some comparable ranged bombardment, with a similar difficulty to "cheap trick" removal. Or, heck, how 'bout dual Ravagores + Shepherd? I'd almost rather see a Gargossal sitting on the point.

And of course, such a strategy has the obvious difficulty of having half of your list allocated to goal-tending, reducing your options for force-concentration elsewhere.

I'm not suggesting it's not a viable strategy, just that you can already do very similar things. Indeed, I'd argue that a Battle Engine is probably a superior choice for this application (depending on the engine, of course!).

-H

[jandrese]

Possibly, the only caveat being that most Battle Engines are pretty squishy. The advantage of the Colossal is that it is tough enough that your opponent has to dedicate a significant effort towards removing it.

[PG_Tionas]

Honestly, I think that they do a number of Game-changing things.

1. Increase the value of Warjacks of all sorts, as they generally have Higher P+S attacks, and can delivery it.
2. Devalue Infantry: With every colossal having an AOE attack, and some of them a downed right scary amount, they will pummel (but not instantly negate) any infantry on the field.
3. They are expected to last more than one turn. What they do is bring a Mind-bending shift in tactics, strategy and meta. A model that will, in almost every instance, Stay standing for more than one round of punishment from almost every set of models on in the game is meta-twisting.
4. Increase the value of ranged attacks. While the EBDT and the Mauler do 55 points of damage, If there is one, two or 7 damage more on that Colossal before you engage it, it drops.
5. The final thing it does is make you consider trades. Do you trade 30+ damage now, for a living warbeast? I know the prevailing thought is that the Mechanics will "completly heal" the thing, but that concept is rubbish. Cryx, Menoth, Mercs and Ret have single-model Mechanics. at 1pt each, they heal a max of 6 damage. In order to, on average, completly heal a colossal from even 30 points of damage, we'd need to spend 8 points in Mechanics. Cygnar and Khador have it easier, but they have a higher chance of failure as well.

These Models change the game like none other before them. I find its an Interesting time to be playing the game,
Take that as you will.

[Ranhothep]

Hmmmm, couldn't the same be said for a lot of other 20-ish point investments?

Other investments can be fought with various different means and piece by piece and/or removed otherwise than by killing. That's the main point of the issue and unique nature of Gargossals.
While there are dual zone scenarios, they are a minority. A Gargossal can even contest two flags in Incursion that are next to each other.
I also agree with the demoralizing effect. It had to be a long and brutal game where someone ended up with no more options to shift/kill a jack. It doesn't require as much on the part of the Gargossal player to make sure the opponent is left without options to deal with the big'un. That's when the demoralizing part can come in. I don't see this however as the biggest problem, experienced players will take this into account allready while listbuilding. Newer players will soon learn (if they don't get demoralized too much ) I'm a bit concerned about what this listbuilding alteration might lead to - the exclusion of certain units/casters alltogether.

[razcalking]

Warmachine is inherently broken at low point levels anyway though, Colossals don't really change that. What if instead of MacBain!!! it had been Darius with two Centurions and a Jr. Warcaster?

Heck, I think even the 35 point level is kind of broken. 50 points seems to be about the sweet spot for game balance. Maybe that weird 42 point level, I'm not sure, and to be fair I have not played many 75 point games so I don't have an especially good sense of how well the balance works at that level.

And that's what Colossals do - they up the points level at which the game is "balanced". Meaning bigger armies and moving slowly away from the skirmish origins of the game.

[jandrese]

5. The final thing it does is make you consider trades. Do you trade 30+ damage now, for a living warbeast? I know the prevailing thought is that the Mechanics will "completly heal" the thing, but that concept is rubbish. Cryx, Menoth, Mercs and Ret have single-model Mechanics. at 1pt each, they heal a max of 6 damage. In order to, on average, completly heal a colossal from even 30 points of damage, we'd need to spend 8 points in Mechanics. Cygnar and Khador have it easier, but they have a higher chance of failure as well.

While healing the Colossal all the way from 1 point to full is not likely, the big thing Colossals bring is the ability to last long enough for the Mechaniks to get a chance to do something other than just reverse some ranged plinking damage. A pair of Stormwalls with Darius and a Jr. Warcaster will be a tough thing to deal with though. One has Arcane Shield, the other Fortify and if you don't completely destroy one, it can come back to full on the feat turn.

[themocaw]

And that's what Colossals do - they up the points level at which the game is "balanced". Meaning bigger armies and moving slowly away from the skirmish origins of the game.

Low points have never been balanced. Colossals don't change that. Up until 50 points, you don't have the points to shore up your weak spots, so your best bet is to focus on your strengths. This results in inherently unbalanced list building with a strong rock-paper-scissors element.

[SteakAndSpirits]

...Or, heck, how 'bout dual Ravagores + Shepherd?

...

-H

Move along, move along. Nothing to see here, folks. Come on, clear the street. Move along, move along.

-s&s

[Hasten]

While healing the Colossal all the way from 1 point to full is not likely, the big thing Colossals bring is the ability to last long enough for the Mechaniks to get a chance to do something other than just reverse some ranged plinking damage.

I kind of like the idea of mechaniks being useful for more than just whatever buffs they bring, with the repair aspect being the corner case =). I also don't mind the idea that we have models that will more reliably survive a charge from a heavy (or most heavies, anyways). It'll require a shift in thinking, and will likely shake up the game a bit. I'm not convinced that any of this is a bad thing, necessarily.

[edit]

Move along, move along. Nothing to see here, folks. Come on, clear the street. Move along, move along.

Ah! Now we see the violence inherent in the system! Come and see the violence inherent in the system!

-H

[SteakAndSpirits]

While healing the Colossal all the way from 1 point to full is not likely, the big thing Colossals bring is the ability to last long enough for the Mechaniks to get a chance to do something other than just reverse some ranged plinking damage.

Which, I might add, is precisely what the founding fathers had in mind all along when they wrote the Jackstitution.

Ah! Now we see the violence inherent in the system! Come and see the violence inherent in the system!

Stop hitting yourself! Stop hitting yourself! Look, you did that, not me! Stop hitting yourself!

-s&s

[Defenstrator]

Low points have never been balanced. Colossals don't change that. Up until 50 points, you don't have the points to shore up your weak spots, so your best bet is to focus on your strengths. This results in inherently unbalanced list building with a strong rock-paper-scissors element.

We're playing a 25 point league as a break from all the 50 point tournament style games we were playing to get ready for Lock and Load. We haven't had a balance issue at all. Of course non of us are using the colossals we picked up at L&L yet, but declarations that the game has all these problems at lower points level are, I feel, rather exaggerated. The thing is that even at that level you can piece trade heavies and there's a variety of things that can deal with them. The colossals feel much more all or nothing and deform the meta in smaller games more because of it.

[blackleagionair]

good job guys

[jandrese]

If you're having no balance issues at 25 points, then your meta is much different than mine.

[MagnustheJust]

If you're having no balance issues at 25 points, then your meta is much different than mine.

You can say that again!!!!

[Lanz]

That's great until your unsupported Colossal gets taken down by something on that flank... there are no hard and fast rules, but having a Colossal on the board concentrates part of the power in your force in an expensive model that cannot be everywhere at once.

A Colossal on the board does not mean that you have to kill it in order to win by scenario...

I don't see a flanking force taking down a colossal unless the game is so big that a "flanking"force is a ten man weapon master unit and a heavy.

[West996]

The people that think just because the Colossal is a big point investment that that ultimatley balances are not looking deep enough.

It is true that you are investing 19-20 points into one model, but this model is different then any model we have had before.

It is not the same as spending 19 points on a super jack. This is not a super jack. It is a Colossal and the rule set supporting it thus far protect those points.

The fact that they can't be placed outside their activation alone changes the whole game and makes those 19 points much less vulnerable then 19 points of Jacks. Then you have the sheer amount of force it takes to actually remove one of these from the table. Every single point invested in this model is in many cases contributing to the game until that last box is marked.

The same can not be said for the same 19 point investment in other things. As you chip away at these other investments, units and even Jacks, they become less effective alone the way. The same is not typically true of a Colossal.

In my opinion, even in 35 points you are not disadvantaging yourself at all by making such a big investment into a Colossal. It is harder then many players are making it sound to simply ignore these things.

Even fielding 2 in 50 points is not tipping the scale as much as some posters seem to think. That investment especially if we are talking about the Stormwall is well spent and well protected. I'll say it again, it is not the same as spending the equivalent amount in Jacks. Colossal are much more durable then Jacks in every way.

19 points of Colossal does not equal 19 points of Jacks. It's worth more.

Everyone thinks it is a disadvantage to pack that many points into one model and conventional wisdom would agree. After reading the rules, and factoring in things like mechanics, no placement effects, ect.. one could argue you gain just as many advantages if not more in buying a Stormwall over the equivalent points in Cygnar Jacks.

[Chad]

It seems like the system wide term balance might be a bit off.

Prefaced with the statement that I haven't played against or with any so far, I can look at the Stormwall and the faction it's in and wonder if all the factors were considered. It's got decent ARM in a faction with Arc shield it's got 4 guns for a total potential of 8 ranged attacks from a single platform. Add to that lightning pods which disrupt and cause pow 10s in a straight line AND provides a 'model' that will interfere with other potential actions, etc. Then it's got P&S 20 fists(!) that also have electro leap. Seriously 4 guns in a faction that has amazing ranged buffs? Ugh.

If you were to split that jack in two it would cost 9.5 points each and have two guns it can fire a turn between 10-14" and a POW 20 weapon. Split in two it would be easier to cripple the individual systems and wouldn't have the additional power attacks and game effect immunity.

It seems to me that the whole is greater than the sum of it's equitable parts - both in terms of actual durability, immunity, and continual damage output. Knock out a whole side, and a single repair point makes it 100% functional again. It is even possible for a the stormwall (for example) to take 35 points of consecutive damage (if hit in column 6 on the left side) and not lose a single system - it's weakest point - left column 1 - requires 15 points of consecutive damage to take out it's left arm.

Khador Jacks requires at worst 18 points to take out a system if they hit in column 3 - at which point you take out the cortex (probably the best system to protect). And the least needed is generally around 10 to get an arm. But it goes deeper than that. Say on a single jack hitting the most guarded system, you do 17 points of damage but need 18 to hit the cortex. The very next damage point has a 50% chance of taking out the system - making focused fire very valuable. On the colossal, on the most fragile system, you have about 1/3 of a chance to hit on of the 4 columns you need. You need higher numbers AND have a less of a chance of additive damage in order to make an impact.

Now, it's true that there are some relative losses - abilities that grant things to battlegroups are less effective, in many cases, on a single investment of 19 vs. two of 9.5, single model buffs are generally better, and it seems the damage output and threat range more than compensates.

All in all I'll have to wait until I get enough games in, but it seems like we'll probably see some more abuses than those that have already been seen.