| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Baneblade Test Thread http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=28456 |
Page 1 of 18 |
| Author: | jimmyzimms [ Tue Nov 04, 2014 4:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Baneblade Test Thread |
Ok I've been lagging on posting this. Rug's told me last week to go ahead and get this discussion going to specifically test the options to trial changes to the Baneblade cannon. As I understand it, the two main contenders are: Commissar Holt's Mutil Shot Idea Baneblade Cannon 75cm 2x AP3+/AT3 (there's an alternate suggestion of AT4+ out there as well) The MW Bandeblade Cannon Baneblade Cannon 75cm MW4+ (IIRC) The "Big Boom " Baneblade Cannon (with Apoc special) Baneblade Cannon 75cm AT3+ OR BP2 [edit: corrected per Kyuss] Let's discuss and test! |
|
| Author: | kyussinchains [ Tue Nov 04, 2014 4:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Baneblade Test Thread |
*ahem* I don't think it was Commissar Holt who first suggested the 2xshot BB cannon  I only know this as I stole it from MikeT and took all credit I like the look of the third option best of all, nice and characterful and like an actual tank firing HE/AP shells! probably better to drop the AP3+ shot from the first fire option though..... |
|
| Author: | jimmyzimms [ Tue Nov 04, 2014 4:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Baneblade Test Thread |
Ah ha so you are correct and the impostor Holt will be apprehended.  (actually it turns out he was the first to actually test it so kudos to Kyuss)So for clarity you're suggesting then this=> The "Big Boom " Baneblade Cannon (with Apoc special) Baneblade Cannon 75cm AT3+ OR BP2 |
|
| Author: | kyussinchains [ Tue Nov 04, 2014 4:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Baneblade Test Thread |
I reckon that's the best place to start from, yes
|
|
| Author: | Dobbsy [ Tue Nov 04, 2014 5:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Baneblade Test Thread |
Would prefer to see it remain the same. The MW4+ option is particularly ... odorous. Just seems yet another MW weapon in the game.Seriously, there is nothing wrong with a 3x 4+FF tank with a pile of shooting weapons. It's a FF support vehicle not a Titan killer. |
|
| Author: | Tiny-Tim [ Tue Nov 04, 2014 5:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Baneblade Test Thread |
I agree with Dobbsy |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Tue Nov 04, 2014 5:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Baneblade Test Thread |
I like the current stats. I think it ended up at a good place. |
|
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Tue Nov 04, 2014 5:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Baneblade Test Thread |
Could we have a minimal change option of 75cm AP2+/AT2+ - so a battlecannon with a big shell, as big as you get prior to being MW/TK/BP etc. |
|
| Author: | Commissar Holt [ Tue Nov 04, 2014 6:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Baneblade Test Thread |
The current stats are 75 cm AP3+/AT3+. I still support (it wasn't my idea originally, I just tested it, sorry for confusion ) the 75 cm 2x AP4+/AT3+ change. The reasons; -It's the smallest change comparing to the other suggestions. -It answers the one real issue of BB, which is; lack of long range firepower, mainly AT firepower. -It fits well into both single and company formation. [I tested both options and was satisfied with the increased punch of the gun.] (It may not be the case with BP weapons, as it would be too low for single, and too high for company.) -It is perhaps closer to the fluff that says BB battlecannon's firepower is around "double" of the Leman Russ battlecannon. |
|
| Author: | Redgeran [ Tue Nov 04, 2014 7:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Baneblade Test Thread |
In retrospect the BP option probably is a bit too drastic and may have unforseen consequences. I've really come around on the idea of commissar holt's 2xap4/at3 option. To maybe sweeten the deal you could get ride of the autocannon stats. Fluff says the autocannon usually is used for tracer rounds for the main cannon and doesn't even fire live ammunition the majority of the time. So the extra shot on the main cannon and the minus autocannon would really round out the BB. Almost exactly twice the firepower of a leman russ and a little over three times the cost. And yes a good bit better than 3 LR in assault. |
|
| Author: | Borka [ Tue Nov 04, 2014 9:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Baneblade Test Thread |
I'd be for Holts idea. 2x AP4+/AT3+ |
|
| Author: | mordoten [ Tue Nov 04, 2014 9:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Baneblade Test Thread |
i also think holts idea is good! |
|
| Author: | jimmyzimms [ Tue Nov 04, 2014 9:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Baneblade Test Thread |
+1 to Holt |
|
| Author: | Redgeran [ Tue Nov 04, 2014 11:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Baneblade Test Thread |
|
|
| Author: | Blip [ Tue Nov 04, 2014 11:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Baneblade Test Thread |
Like I said in the other thread, I've played them 3/4 time with basically these stats (4+/4+) with no complaints and one "nice to see the baneblades actually on the table and doing something." They basically become a slightly cheaper LR Co - which as I see one of the (small) issues with the IG list being the large cost Cos limiting the viable builds, this option made a nice option to try some different options. While I'd like to have 6BP, hard to suppress bastion, I think this would have been a bit more controversial (though probably, without indirect, not that much more effective in reality.) |
|
| Page 1 of 18 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|