Tactical Command | View topic

Page 1 of 2

[ 16 posts ]

Go to page 1, 2 Next

View unanswered posts | View active topics View unread posts | View new posts | View your posts

Cost of AMHC

The_Real_Chris

Post subject: Cost of AMHC

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2007 2:19 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London

Well they are my first choice - skimmer makes up for RA in a big way for me. I feel they are by far the best medium tank int he game - epics t-34 as it were.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' Ã¢â‚¬â€œ Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Top

Dobbsy

Post subject: Cost of AMHC

Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 4:41 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia

So are the Hammerheads too cheap?

No.

This isn't about removing the AMHC, but consideration about it's cost. We can assume that the IG has Commissar in there, which gives Vanquisher Fearless, Inspiring and Leader
Plus if you remove the drones(why are they even included in that equation? It's no real comparison if you are including upgrades...) you're looking at 8 non-RA vehicles for 500 as opposed to 10 RA vehicles for 650 with a free upgrade... while some people may think skimmer makes up for RA, it doesn't. Skimmers can only hide for so long. Once they get caught in range, they don't stand up as well as the 10 RA vehicles. Try taking on that same IG tank company with the AMHC. I'm betting I know which formation comes out on top...

Also, 65 points for a LR = 62.5 for a HH. It's not that big a difference already.

Top

Evil and Chaos

Post subject: Cost of AMHC

Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 10:27 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

75cm range is a big advantage, only the IG battle tanks can strike out as far without doubling.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Top

The_Real_Chris

Post subject: Cost of AMHC

Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 11:06 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London

Yes the range and skimmer is a great combo - plus the LR biggest weaknesses are crossfire and close assault. Skimmer means you are immune and the speed of the tank is fantastic (helping avoid crossfire and fight assaults defensively etc). I would take them over russ any day of the week - for teh speed, the weapons and skimmer.

Top

Dobbsy

Post subject: Cost of AMHC

Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 12:16 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia

So HHs can't be crossfired? I must remember that in my next game :;):

Just kidding TRC.

300 points for 6 Falcons (using suggested Sword of Vaul updates)
375 for 6 Hammerheads

So, falcons are faster, slightly less armoured, their range is shorter but they fire twice with their main weapon, they can take troops to a FF for which they themselves get a 4+ FF oh, and you conveniently forget Hit and Run which is quite a boost to their survivability and which also must be taken into account when costing the Falcon.

So Falcon 50 points vs HH 62.5 per vehicle.

Sure there are ways to counter it (for example overwatch, indirect weapons, aircrafts), but it's still very nasty.
I think you have partly answered your own question here Hena.
Skimmer isn't the game winner you seem to think under the new Skimmer rules either. Smart opponents can utilise terrain to their advantage now. And skimmer means nothing when your opponent can FF you off the table (which has happened to me a few times) - eventually you have to manouvre about the table and bring your formation into some form of attack range. You can't possibly say that Skimmer is better than 4+ RA, Hena.

Look, if CS wants to up their cost I can't do anything about it. I've said my piece.

Top

Evil and Chaos

Post subject: Cost of AMHC

Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 12:37 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire

There is no way the cost of Hammerheads should come down, they're already very very powerful.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Top

Jstr19

Post subject: Cost of AMHC

Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 1:25 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 1:33 am
Posts: 340

I'm not convinced that HH need a points rise. they seem appropriately priced at the moment as they are pretty fragile against return fire. my usual opponent is well aware of how brutal they can be and goes gunning for them.

Top

The_Real_Chris

Post subject: Cost of AMHC

Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 5:50 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London

Who are your usual opponents and how many formations do you take (3 I find is a good number for an armour heavy force, 1 ion the other two rail - course this was when ions were flak).

Top

Jstr19

Post subject: Cost of AMHC

Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 5:09 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 1:33 am
Posts: 340

I normally try and balance the army with a good mix of armour and infantry. Using Broadsides to deal with enemy armour and a 6 strong HH formation that is usually give an infantry support role with 6 Ion Cannons.

Top

Dobbsy

Post subject: Cost of AMHC

Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 11:11 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia

I see and take pretty much the same thing as you jstr19. I usually go with 1 AMHC with 8 railguns and 1 with 6 Ion cannons then fill in the rest of the army with other gear like troops and aircraft. Even with 8 they take a pounding most games as they are BTS.

There is no way the cost of Hammerheads should come down, they're already very very powerful

I'm not sure who is calling for this E&C.... I'm certainly not.

Top

thurse

Post subject: Cost of AMHC

Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 10:29 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 3:13 pm
Posts: 185
Location: Dundee, Scotland

Hi!

1) When you compare HH with falcons, you omit the versatility of the tau tank. Falcons are great against armoured vehicules but not against infantry. HH are very efficient against both. Furthermore the indirect fire possibility is an important "plus"

2) I like to field 2 formations of 6 ionheads. Compared to railheads, they have
- twice the AP firepower on every order
- the same AT firepower on advance, better on sutain, worese on double.
The difference in range is not negligible, but the gain in firepower is too much.

3) On the loss of AA for ionheads, the new scorpionship does more than compensating... But it's not the subject

Top

Lion in the Stars

Post subject: Cost of AMHC

Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2007 5:26 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 11:01 pm
Posts: 1455

well, 2 AHMCs plus Network Drones for each are 700, versus 650 for the LRuss company. I'd much rather have the 2 AHMC (lets me split fire if I need to, or really murder one target with or without using Co-Fire). As much as I really don't like the idea of losing some speed (that's a bigger change than some seem to realize), I think that the hammerheads are too attractive in comparison to a FW cadre, so could probably stand a points increase to 400 for the bare cadre.

Just a quick question, does anyone NOT take an AHMC with the Networked Drones?

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"

Top

Print view

Previous topic | Next topic

Page 1 of 2

[ 16 posts ]

Go to page 1, 2 Next

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:

Cost of AMHC

Who is online