Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 2 of 3
  [ 37 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Inquisition Aircraft
ragnarok
 Post subject: Inquisition Aircraft
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 7:08 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 2:43 pm
Posts: 2084
Location: Reading, England
I think we should keep the gun cutters and pegasus landers in the list, but possiblealso add in the aquila (when is it goig to be released in epic?) and Arvus.

They could be the light versions of the gun cutter and pegasus.

Just as you have the Aquila as a smaller cutter the Arvus could bea smaller Pegasus, with no guns and fewer transport spaces.

You give up fire power for having youreggs in more baskets, incase then enemy hits the planetfalling formation with OW.

I would also, either make all landers a seperate formation that can carry other formations (so you could have a gun cutter and a pait of arvus for example), or skimmers thatare partof the ground formation.

_________________
Tyranid air marshal
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Inquisition Aircraft
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:03 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

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

(pixelgeek @ Jun. 19 2008,16:32)
QUOTE

(Evil and Chaos @ Jun. 19 2008,08:14)
QUOTE
Then a Vulture or Valkyrie should be able to have a 'Flight Planetfall' too, surely?

I can't imagine that they are pressurised to withstand a drop from orbit

The proposal was to represent the Arvus'/Aquilla's ability to fly high over the battlefield and then fly down via 'Free planetfall'.

This doesn't work for me, as the Vulture/Valkyrie should have that same ability if you're using that justification.

Likewise, I don't see why an Aquilla would get 'Free Planetfall' for being able to fly transatmospheric, if a Thunderhawk Gunship doesn't have 'Free Planetfall' and needs a Strike Cruiser to drop from in order to gain the Planetfall ability.

Leave Free Planetfall on the 'small spacecraft' like the Manta, and use the proper 'Planetfall' rule, if you really do want a planetfall-esque ability on the Arvus/Aquilla.


Planetfall Creep... nearly as bad as MW creep... :D




_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
pixelgeek
 Post subject: Inquisition Aircraft
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:09 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

(Evil and Chaos @ Jun. 19 2008,16:03)
QUOTE
Likewise, I don't see why an Aquilla would get 'Free Planetfall' for being able to fly transatmospheric, if a Thunderhawk Gunship doesn't have 'Free Planetfall' and needs a Strike Cruiser to drop from in order to gain the Planetfall ability.


Different lists. Different issues.

Isn't there a "free" item in one of your lists?




_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Inquisition Aircraft
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:21 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
@Pixelgeek
You really have a bee in your bonnet about supposed "free" items in lists don't you?


There are many different kinds of free items.

This is an example of a free ability (Planetfall) that is unjustified, when you remember that Free Planetfall was introduced in order to allow 'small spacecraft' that could operate semi-autonomously to planetfall on their own.

An Aquilla Lander is not a semi-autonomous space ship, it is a small shuttle.

@Pixelgeek
Isn't there a "free" item in one of your lists?

Half a dozen in the AMTL army list. However they're actually costed into the base cost of the formation (Which is of course fixed at a pre-set size, that being the size of the Titan(s) in question).

I take umbrage with free items when they're not balanced ingame, or don't match the background, not simply because they're 'free'.




_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
pixelgeek
 Post subject: Inquisition Aircraft
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:07 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

(Evil and Chaos @ Jun. 19 2008,16:21)
QUOTE
There are many different kinds of free items.

I'll add that to my sig for future reference. :-)

This is an example of a free ability (Planetfall) that is unjustified...


So this is a bad "free" ability?

And how is any ability "free" if it is included in the cost of the unit? If it has an impact on the unit then surely that can be reflected in the price and therefore it is no longer "free". Is that not the case?

If you want to argue that the ability isn't warranted for a technical reason then do so but lets have less complaints about "free" abilities and items. It almost is never the actual point

I take umbrage with free items when they're not balanced ingame, or don't match the background, not simply because they're 'free'.

As you are quick to point out when someone points out your free items.

Its a bogus argument and it is really well past the point where people stopped using it.

Especially when they want to include free items in their own army lists.

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Inquisition Aircraft
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:19 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
So this is a bad "free" ability?


No, it's an ability that doesn't match the background / rules of the 40k universe.

Being 'free' has nothing to do with it, the fact that it's an unrepresentative rule is the main problem, as I've already said three times in this thread.



I was going to reply to some other points you raise, but they're somewhat OT so I'm going to be the smaller man and ceede the floor to you Pixelgeek.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Lord Inquisitor
 Post subject: Inquisition Aircraft
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:21 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 1216
Location: Norfolk VA USA
Any comments on the original proposal?

What do people think of the ability to allow aircraft, when landed, to act as skimmers with move 35cm?

Ultimately I would guess that it wouldn't come up much unless there was a huge amount of AA on the board. You're going to land, disembark troops (potentially into assault), and I would wager still disengage at the end of the turn. But it would mean remaining on the board as a transport not entirely suicide, and could prove to be something of an interesting tweak to the usual fliers.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Pulsar
 Post subject: Inquisition Aircraft
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:59 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 726
Location: London

(Lord Inquisitor @ Jun. 20 2008,01:21)
QUOTE
Any comments on the original proposal?

What do people think of the ability to allow aircraft, when landed, to act as skimmers with move 35cm?

Ultimately I would guess that it wouldn't come up much unless there was a huge amount of AA on the board. You're going to land, disembark troops (potentially into assault), and I would wager still disengage at the end of the turn. But it would mean remaining on the board as a transport not entirely suicide, and could prove to be something of an interesting tweak to the usual fliers.

How about instead of being able to move in the turn that they come on using flyer movment, if they then choose to not disinguage in the end phase like normal in the next turn it can move like a normal skimmer with 35cm move?

_________________
"Dyslexia is a Privilege, not a right"
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
pixelgeek
 Post subject: Inquisition Aircraft
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 2:13 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

(Lord Inquisitor @ Jun. 19 2008,17:21)
QUOTE
Any comments on the original proposal?

Quit trying to ruin my fun :-)

What do people think of the ability to allow aircraft, when landed, to act as skimmers with move 35cm?


I don't have an issue with the rule itself, I just think that the implementation is a bit complex.

Can you find a simpler way to frame the rules?




_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Lord Inquisitor
 Post subject: Inquisition Aircraft
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 2:20 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 1216
Location: Norfolk VA USA

(Pulsar @ Jun. 19 2008,20:59)
QUOTE
How about instead of being able to move in the turn that they come on using flyer movment, if they then choose to not disinguage in the end phase like normal in the next turn it can move like a normal skimmer with 35cm move?

Isn't that what it does?

On the turn you land, you will have used the aircraft's activation for the turn. So, basically, you're only going to use the skimmer movement (barring withdrawal moves) next turn and only if you stay on the board.


(pixelgeek @ Jun. 19 2008,21:13)
QUOTE
Can you find a simpler way to frame the rules?

It seems simple enough to me in concept:

Instead of move 0cm when landed, it has move 35cm and Skimmer.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
pixelgeek
 Post subject: Inquisition Aircraft
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 2:34 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 8:10 pm
Posts: 2642
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

(Lord Inquisitor @ Jun. 19 2008,18:20)
QUOTE
It seems simple enough to me in concept:

Yah, but you wrote it. :-)

The issue for me is that you have an aircraft that lands and then can move. So how does that work with the rules that already presume that a landed aircraft is immobile.

My problem is that you are creating an exception to a rule that is contrary by its very nature (landed/immobile versus flying).

What about giving it two stat entries? One for flying and one for VTOL?

There islso a distinct difference in function between a VTOL aircraft and something like a skimmer. A Harrier performs nothing like a helicopter




_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Olly
 Post subject: Inquisition Aircraft
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:03 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 3:00 am
Posts: 192
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Having had a good think about I believe you should just leave them as basic aircraft without the VTOL. As E&C said the aquila isn't a purely independent craft its a weaponless shuttle, the transport air rules represent this well no need to change them.
The gun-cutter whilst an independent craft still functions best as an aircraft in a similar vein to the thunderhawk. As its ability to 'hang around' the battlefield is best represented by the strafing/ground attack runs it makes after its dropped its cargo off (as in the fluff) In epic keep it simple there's no need to invent or complicate new rules when the old ones can do the job just as well
just my 2c

_________________
Ideas are like soda cans, recycling sucks
If you talk to God you're religious. If God talks to you, you're psychotic
My Epic Blog
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
BlackLegion
 Post subject: Inquisition Aircraft
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:24 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8711
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe
Hmmm after i finally started to read the Eisenhorn Omnibus i read the description of the Gun-Cutter. So i have the following hmmm yorry problems with your stats:
1. The Gun-Cutter is described to being 80m in length. Thats more than an Imperator Titan is big (46m). And you gave it only DC2. To me Gun-Cuter looks even bigger than the Space Marine Landing Craft.
2. The Gun-Cutter is used by Eisenhorn. To my understanding every Inwisutor is an individual which uses whatever he seems fit to. So why did include the Gun-Cutter as a standard aircraft to Inquisitorial forces? Same with Glavian pilots. Eisenhornis furtunate to have one but i don't think that they are a commonor even rare feature in "srandart" Inquisitorial Forces.
To my understanding both the Gun-Cutter and the Glavian pilot are unique to Inquisitor Eisenhorn.

Somy question: Is your Inqusition TaskForce amry list a "standart" list or or the army of a particular named Inquisitor?


On the VTLO stuf: I already proposed this to several existing aircrafts in a different thread :D
So a big yes from me ;)




_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Lord Inquisitor
 Post subject: Inquisition Aircraft
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 3:58 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 1216
Location: Norfolk VA USA
80 meters? Huh. I'm pretty sure that craft changes in size somewhat depending on circumstance during the books, and I'm pretty sure we can find several conflicting sizes for the Titans. In any case, the low DC may be representative of fairly weak or spindly structure.

Yes, this list is firmly based on the Eisenhorn trilogy, but as I've tried to make clear with the "counts as" notes throughout the book that it need not be a gun-cutter necessarily. If you want to call it a naval pinnace, be my guest. The bottom line is that most people would relate to the gun-cutter more than any other aircraft, so why not use that as the template? Similarly, the Glavian pilot simply represents the Inquisition have the finest pilots in the Imperium... but since Glavia is the only such example that comes to mind and everyone that's read the books will have a pre-existing empathy for Betancore, why not actually call it that?

I can call it an Ordo Helican Task Force if you would like a more defined link with Eisenhorn... I've not decided on the background yet.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Olly
 Post subject: Inquisition Aircraft
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 2:09 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 3:00 am
Posts: 192
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Yeah the gun cutter from eiserhorn has been discussed in extremelength on some of the 40k role playing forums and the general consesus is that its 80m long and gross displacement of 20,000lb. To be honest I don't believe the gun cutter is a set model of craft but rather a title for the generic group of craft that fit into a semi-set category. Similar to saying "those are Navy fighters"
"Yes, and this is a Thunderbolt and thats a lightning" if you get my drift, but thats a bit more background then VTOL rules, so once again I say leave them as plain aircraft

If you don't want to make it the Ordo Helican list you could just make the Glavian pilot upgrade to somesort of fancy veteran/Ace navy pilot upgrade (using an official rank, pos. Ace?)

_________________
Ideas are like soda cans, recycling sucks
If you talk to God you're religious. If God talks to you, you're psychotic
My Epic Blog
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 2 of 3
  [ 37 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  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

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net