Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 268 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 18  Next

[NetEA] Iron Hands (Experimental)

 Post subject: [NetEA] Iron Hands (Experimental)
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 3:55 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 9022
Location: Manalapan, FL
OK folks after discussion with Dobbsy regarding the need for a new Iron Hands AC that has yet to be filled and the desire to keep this list moving forward we've come to a rather unique decision. Recognizing that I really don't have the time available to dedicate to the needs and responsibilities of a full AC position but lacking anyone else clamoring for the job I will act as a temporary "List Caretaker" for lack of a better term. Fundamentally I will act as defacto SubAC for now albeit in a more limited fashion from a time allotment in perspective of the NetEA Charter. I will answer questions, conduct playtests, recruit players, drive list development forward and in general see the list promoted for, hopefully, full incorporation into the compendium in the future until such a time as a full AC steps forward to take the job (or somehow I eventually get us to a finalized balanced list over time and this becomes moot ;) ).

I guess it can be summed up as "I'll take the job until I get killed or you find somebody better" :spin

We will take the list development starting from the the current .4 version in the above link.

============================

Current Version 1.0 ALPHA:
This is what, baring major issues what I intend to push into Development status during the next month
Attachment:
The attachment Iron Hands Chapter Army List.pdf is no longer available



Attachment:
Iron Hands Chapter Army List.pdf [614.15 KiB]
Downloaded 871 times

============================

Battle Reports Thread

Thanks everyone for your support & feedback.

-Jimmy Zimms, The Not Iron Hands AC

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!


Last edited by jimmyzimms on Mon Dec 24, 2012 9:08 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [NetEA] Iron Hands
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 3:58 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 12:13 am
Posts: 8709
Location: Leipzig, Germany, Europe, Sol III, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe
Welcome to the non-job ;D

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [NetEA] Iron Hands
PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:06 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 1:48 pm
Posts: 680
Location: Australia
Some thoughts if I may:

Any chance the Land Raider upgrade can become 1-3? This would then allow the whole clan to mount up in Land Raiders - I figure the Iron Hand's holdings of heavy armour would allow such an undertaking. This would also then works with the veteran officer option in the Clan to give 4x tac, 2x vets, 4x LR.

Is there any reason for teleport on the vet officers and great council units? I can't see how they will get to use it as they're always stuck with non-teleporting models as far as I can tell?

What is the idea behind the "Light Recon" ? are they just a cheap tactical option? I guess "scout" gives it the ability to spread out more but it misses out on "infiltrator" or "sniper" upgrades. Also, unless it drops its transport altogether it can't garrison either as far as I can tell. I guess it works, just feels like to me like an almost double up of the Clan formation or needs to be able to garrison with its own transport. Maybe some scout bikers as outriders instead of the 2x tac units?

Finally, may I suggest that for future formatting of the list that the restricted formations move below the standard detachments in order to keep the 1/3 points restricted stuff together? You may even consider sending the Thunderhawk and landing craft into this section if you want to decrease the temptation to air assault.

Cheers, looking forward to having a trial of this list in the new year.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [NetEA] Iron Hands
PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 4:42 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 9022
Location: Manalapan, FL
Oh look, someone's interested! ;)
Actually good feedback and glad to see some IH love. Comments inline->

ortron wrote:
Some thoughts if I may:
Any chance the Land Raider upgrade can become 1-3? This would then allow the whole clan to mount up in Land Raiders - I figure the Iron Hand's holdings of heavy armour would allow such an undertaking. This would also then works with the veteran officer option in the Clan to give 4x tac, 2x vets, 4x LR.

Actually that is an option if you look at the upgrades column. I guess this is a case of confusing layout (who has 2 thumbs and is guilty? THIS GUY! [points to self]). As i had +transport on the rest of the formation it looked odd for the veterans to have nothing next to them so I added the note. Originally I thought to have +land raider but then thought better of it as i didn't want it to be a points sink for drop pod assaults which is the whole IH style. I should redact this to make more clear.

orton wrote:
Is there any reason for teleport on the vet officers and great council units? I can't see how they will get to use it as they're always stuck with non-teleporting models as far as I can tell?


Yeah that's a case of copy&paste-itis from the codex list. I'll remove that and think of point drop or an alternate ability that feels fluffy. Suggestions?

orton wrote:
What is the idea behind the "Light Recon" ? are they just a cheap tactical option? I guess "scout" gives it the ability to spread out more but it misses out on "infiltrator" or "sniper" upgrades. Also, unless it drops its transport altogether it can't garrison either as far as I can tell. I guess it works, just feels like to me like an almost double up of the Clan formation or needs to be able to garrison with its own transport. Maybe some scout bikers as outriders instead of the 2x tac units?

Cheap harrasment and garrison force. The IH are noted as not using separate scout formations and attaching them under the leadership of battle brothers but I didn't want to simply copy the equivalent BT formation so tried this approx idea of aspirant + tacticals. I was hoping that the tacticals would add a bit more bite to the formation. This also is the primary formation that i expected we'd see lots of dreds taken. A Lt Recon + Venerable dred dug into cover on OW is a tough nut to crack. Check out this bat rep, they basically won me the game with some garrison shenanigans. I will admit this is the formation that needs the most playtesting and potential rework so i am eager to get your feedback.

orton wrote:
Finally, may I suggest that for future formatting of the list that the restricted formations move below the standard detachments in order to keep the 1/3 points restricted stuff together? You may even consider sending the Thunderhawk and landing craft into this section if you want to decrease the temptation to air assault.

Totally nicked the layout from the Sallies list :) will take your suggestions on format and not a bad idea about 1/3 on THawks! Perhaps a seperate Air section instead?

orton wrote:
Cheers, looking forward to having a trial of this list in the new year.

Great!!!

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [NetEA] Iron Hands
PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 4:52 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 9022
Location: Manalapan, FL
Thoughts for Iron Hands:

-Good armor crackers. Lots of good AT ability.
-Appear to be viable at lower points. Need to start focusing on larger games.
-Air power is next on the list to start checking out.
-Potential trouble with swarm / pest armies. Need to find a good pest control strategy soon.

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [NetEA] Iron Hands
PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:21 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 1:48 pm
Posts: 680
Location: Australia
Quote:
Actually that is an option if you look at the upgrades column. I guess this is a case of confusing layout (who has 2 thumbs and is guilty? THIS GUY! [points to self]). As i had +transport on the rest of the formation it looked odd for the veterans to have nothing next to them so I added the note. Originally I thought to have +land raider but then thought better of it as i didn't want it to be a points sink for drop pod assaults which is the whole IH style. I should redact this to make more clear.


Hmm... ok I think we both want the same thing but the way i read it was that the clan could take 1-2 LR from the LR upgrade + 1 for the Vet officers.
Given vets are = terminators I assumed it was a 1-1 ration lift, therefore needing 4 LR to put the entire formation in LR.

My two options to make your intent clearer. Change the option to read "may take 1 Land Raider transport each for +75 points" (thus allowing each vet officer his own ride)

OR

Change the LR upgrade to read "add up to 3 Land Raiders" (thus allowing any clan makeup the option of riding in Land Raiders, whilst the bonus one from the vet officers allows the 4x Tac, 2x Vet& 4x LR option. (This would be my preferred option)

As above, I think we both want the same thing, just the wording needs clarification.

Quote:
Yeah that's a case of copy&paste-itis from the codex list. I'll remove that and think of point drop or an alternate ability that feels fluffy. Suggestions?


Perhaps Invulnerable Save to account for the heavy bionic augmentation - might be a bit much though?

Quote:
Cheap harassment and garrison force. The IH are noted as not using separate scout formations and attaching them under the leadership of battle brothers but I didn't want to simply copy the equivalent BT formation so tried this approx idea of aspirant + tacticals. I was hoping that the tacticals would add a bit more bite to the formation. This also is the primary formation that i expected we'd see lots of dreds taken. A Lt Recon + Venerable dred dug into cover on OW is a tough nut to crack. Check out this bat rep, they basically won me the game with some garrison shenanigans. I will admit this is the formation that needs the most playtesting and potential rework so i am eager to get your feedback.


I like the idea of scouts under the guidance of full battle brothers. Read the bat rep but wasn't sure how you garrisoned the unit. Wouldn't half the unit need "scout" ability or are you dropping the transports? Current base make up is 4 units with and 5 without scout (2x tac & 3x rhino) and the options don't obviously help in getting more scouts. I guess you could make it like the chaos marine scout formation where every unit in the formation gets "scout" and then cost accordingly. Given the IH being fairly mechanised, I would like to see their recon screen able to act with transports. If garrisoning is only possible through dropping transports, I would think this formation would become less popular than a Clan as it isn't that much more expensive and can max out on up to 5 dreads. The Light recon is limited to 2x standard dreds as no Venerable dred option exists under the 0.4v of list (as far as I can tell).

Quote:
Totally nicked the layout from the Sallies list will take your suggestions on format and not a bad idea about 1/3 on THawks! Perhaps a seperate Air section instead?


A final one for the air side if I may, the Storm Talon looks a bit underdone for a 100pt flyer. I think maybe this could be addressed through looking at the weapon load initially. I think you could consider the current gattling cannons getting an upgrade to 15cm AP5+/AT5+/AA5+ or given they're TL assault cannons, maybe a single 15cm AP4+/AT4+/AA4+. The rocket pod can probably stay as is for now but may need a boost as well.


Anyway, I guess I need to get some actual games in before I comment too much more.

Thanks for you Not-quite-AC work. Look fwd to your next batrep.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [NetEA] Iron Hands
PostPosted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 6:09 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 9022
Location: Manalapan, FL
Not in any order of importance:

ortron wrote:
A final one for the air side if I may, the Storm Talon looks a bit underdone for a 100pt flyer. I think maybe this could be addressed through looking at the weapon load initially. I think you could consider the current gattling cannons getting an upgrade to 15cm AP5+/AT5+/AA5+ or given they're TL assault cannons, maybe a single 15cm AP4+/AT4+/AA4+. The rocket pod can probably stay as is for now but may need a boost as well.

Yeah 4+ is an idea. You should read this thread (yes I mean ALL 19 pages, for reals) before you see just how contentious that one was :D

http://www.taccmd.tacticalwargames.net/ ... hp?t=23196

I actually agree this guy needs work but am hoping we can back this up needs up with real stats and batreps and then re-open the debate from a stand point of actual data vs. "ohhh skurrry" and "I disagree because [insert opinion]" which pretty much exemplified that thread at the end :D

I should note the stats I have in there are old and incorrect (more a case of entertaining 2 year old while list building - a not recommended practice :D ). It is supposed to be a 2x attack AC

I'll add it to the corrections list and get that republished ASAP (like tonight)


ortron wrote:
Hmm... ok I think we both want the same thing but the way i read it was that the clan could take 1-2 LR from the LR upgrade + 1 for the Vet officers.
Given vets are = terminators I assumed it was a 1-1 ration lift, therefore needing 4 LR to put the entire formation in LR.

My two options to make your intent clearer. Change the option to read "may take 1 Land Raider transport each for +75 points" (thus allowing each vet officer his own ride)

OR

Change the LR upgrade to read "add up to 3 Land Raiders" (thus allowing any clan makeup the option of riding in Land Raiders, whilst the bonus one from the vet officers allows the 4x Tac, 2x Vet& 4x LR option. (This would be my preferred option)

As above, I think we both want the same thing, just the wording needs clarification.


We're thinking the same thing in the end. The intention is simply not clear here in the way I put it togetehr.

I will propose these changes->
Rework the entire upgrades section to be "Up to two upgrades may be taken Iron Hands detachment or once per Clan. No upgrade may be taken more than once". The Land Raiders will be "Add any number of Land Raiders, up to the number required to transport the formation" similar to the wording in Hunters. The goal of LR was to be for a heavy Mech Infantry formation vs Armoured Cav scenario so the limitation was not intended to be on the number vs the way they are taken. Thoughts?

ortron wrote:
Perhaps Invulnerable Save to account for the heavy bionic augmentation - might be a bit much though?

I've thought about how we can work bionics into the list, even in a wider more generic option. Nothing has really worked out right so far. In addition, the Council Retinue already has Inv Sav so I'd love to come up with another option that allows them to trade Teleport for this other ability, whatever it may be.

ortron wrote:
I like the idea of scouts under the guidance of full battle brothers. Read the bat rep but wasn't sure how you garrisoned the unit. Wouldn't half the unit need "scout" ability or are you dropping the transports? Current base make up is 4 units with and 5 without scout (2x tac & 3x rhino) and the options don't obviously help in getting more scouts. I guess you could make it like the chaos marine scout formation where every unit in the formation gets "scout" and then cost accordingly. Given the IH being fairly mechanised, I would like to see their recon screen able to act with transports.


Good feedback. I'll add some thought cycles to this. We'll probably find we need to bump the price up but if it makes sense let's do it! I'll check out the chaos scout marine formation for inspiration and/or theft :D (which list BTW?)

In addition I am contemplating the following:

- Drop Stormeagle. They are an alternate air assault vehicle and I feel I was trying to shoehorn them into this list as some sorta bomber replacement.
- Add Thunderhawk Bomber straight from the BT list. They seem to work well and balanced there and should be a better fit as an All Astartes bomber unit.
- Add LR Crusader as limited LR upgrade for pest control strategy. While I wanted to keep as close to vanilla equipment I'll point out the ONLY GW artwork for IH I've seen for a Land Raider was a Crusader (and no it wasn't a BT one, I double checked). Might be the one place to go off the reservation, so to speak.
- IH Devestators are a little too specialized with AT only shots.
Perhaps a variation of the guard autocannon shots where we have something like: "count up units and divide by two (rounding up). 1/2 shots are HB and the other half are LC". Sounds kinda hooky though. Perhaps I should go 1 HB and 1LC for each IH stand? Regress to classic ML and be done? Another option is to go the DA route and give another devastator option for Pure LC vs Pure HB stands? This could allow some list tailoring that might make pest control not be an issue (looking at you Orks and 'Nids)
- Flesh is weak doesn't really do what I want it to do. It's intended to represent the whole grim IH attitude to push on through any amount of pain and firepower coming at them to get to grips with the enemy and not about after you've lost the fight.
In Epic this scope will be best represented as anything in an Engage action and about getting into the fight and shrugging off the wounds. Perhaps instead FiW should be a reroll on infantry stands in an engage that fail their save can reroll and save on +6. This makes it less powerful than Inv Save and Reinforce Armour but still useful. I am afraid that a simple - reroll might be OTT, even without the MW guard that RA has. Input?

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [NetEA] Iron Hands
PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:33 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 1:48 pm
Posts: 680
Location: Australia
Sorry JZ,

Its been hard to get near a non-work computer recently.

I think the devs are ok but wouldn't suggest the LC & HB mix - better off just with standard ML.

Storm eagle could go but why then bring in the THawk bomber? what's the reasoning on this?

LR Crusader is probably a good idea.

Flesh is week seems ok on paper but can't playtest until the new year. Bonus to engage action might work but would you then need to include a downside?

As a thought, could the Iron hands possibly include some heresy era weaponry to give them a distinct feel. Something like a limited access to either Fellblades(IG Superheavys?), Leviathan, LR Spartans, or the LR Typhon assault tank?
- Just a thought to add something to the list but avoid adding any more air units. Also fluff talks of Iron hands having large convoys of heavy crawlers on Medusa - what if these were deployable elsewhere?

I'm about to move house so might be a while responding, have a good xmas!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [NetEA] Iron Hands
PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:32 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia
On the bionics option, instead of an invulnerable save why not have a 6+ "Reinforced" save on top of their 4+. It would work vs MW saves etc but not be there for everything as Invulnerable gives. Sort of one step down as it were.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [NetEA] Iron Hands
PostPosted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 11:01 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 9022
Location: Manalapan, FL
ortron wrote:
Sorry JZ, Its been hard to get near a non-work computer recently.

Sacrilege! You should be spending all day everyday devoted to NetEA! Yeah of course mate, no worries. This thing is rough so any amount of extra playtime is greatly appreciated. Might have to hit you up on a play by mail internet game sometime!

ortron wrote:
I think the devs are ok but wouldn't suggest the LC & HB mix - better off just with standard ML.

Yeah it fails the two beers test and I can tell it's being forced. For now I'll keep Tac/Dev as they are. Part of the over all balancing for the list in toto is the lack of tactical flexibility of individual stands. Now all that being said, it's not a requirement to not rethink that, but it's there for now working and provides some uniqueness to the list.

ortron wrote:
Storm eagle could go but why then bring in the THawk bomber? what's the reasoning on this?

As they lack navy allies the closest bomber unit in a pure astartes list would be the THawk bomber to replace the loss of marauders.

ortron wrote:
LR Crusader is probably a good idea.

Agreed. I'll slot it in for the next version.

ortron wrote:
Flesh is week seems ok on paper but can't playtest until the new year. Bonus to engage action might work but would you then need to include a downside?

Need that Venerable Dred to get it (outside of the clan the supreme commander is in) which opens the formation up to AT fire. Really makes you think twice before loading up on them (and gently leading you to Drop Pod City for your clan(s) involved).

ortron wrote:
As a thought, could the Iron hands possibly include some heresy era weaponry to give them a distinct feel. Something like a limited access to either Fellblades(IG Superheavys?), Leviathan, LR Spartans, or the LR Typhon assault tank?

Let's get some reasonable (3-4k) games under our belt and let's discuss this. if anything a Spartan Assault tank might be more in order to the LR as Assault Carrier playstyle. Though I hate to drag units not in typical availability into this list anymore than I had to with Storm Talons. I need to play with some easy conversions as a how to guide to massage my conscience :D

ortron wrote:
Also fluff talks of Iron hands having large convoys of heavy crawlers on Medusa - what if these were deployable elsewhere?

Might be a good idea. Perhaps we can Cap Imperialis as Crawler Proxy for this? Again, we need to bake some more thought on this first but interesting idea (could always be added as a note for friendly play)

ortron wrote:
I'm about to move house so might be a while responding, have a good xmas!

And a great ChrisKwanzicah back-atacha!!

Dobbsy wrote:
On the bionics option, instead of an invulnerable save why not have a 6+ "Reinforced" save on top of their 4+. It would work vs MW saves etc but not be there for everything as Invulnerable gives. Sort of one step down as it were.

I had thought of the same thing myself over the US thanksgiving holiday. Glad to know we're converging on ideas (lends credence to them). Would you see this as formation upgrade or as army wide special ability (sans aspirants of course)? I'd lean towards the former. Thoughts?

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [NetEA] Iron Hands
PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 2:10 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Nah, I'd go with the latter actually in the testing phase. If that's what they're into Chapter-wide, it makes more sense. They can just be adjusted by price or have their formations adjusted. The Great Clan in particular might need to be changed if the infantry all get a 6+ RA as we should probably avoid a very large formation with RA if there's no penalties/weakness to the army.

Basically, my view when doing a list is: if you give something basic a bonus, you should look at taking something away (from the formation, or the army as a whole) or jack up the price proportionately.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [NetEA] Iron Hands
PostPosted: Sun Dec 23, 2012 9:38 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 9022
Location: Manalapan, FL
OK a small set of refinements in the current list (DL in OP)
In short:

-Renamed armour detachments from unit name to "purpose driven" names. e.g. Vindicators is instead Close Quarters Support. No ability or point changes.
-Removed teleport from all termi style units (not needed)
-Removed Stormeagle and added Thunderhawk Bomber (taken verbatim from the current BT list - this might need a points increase)
-Reworked Storm Talon with my variation of the current working unit stats (the other variation under debate is BLs version, see here and here)
-Reworded Flesh is Weak to better clarify WHEN it must be declared and how the presence the Supreme Commander on the board effects it)
-Per Orton's suggestion, I've added a IH specific tactical unit with Scout only available for the Light Recon force. I've bumped the formation up +50 points. I have some doubts on this but I'm going to roll with it and see where it takes us.
-Great Council retinue upgrade no longer counts towards formation upgrade count. Effectively it means you can put your Supreme Commander in a Clan (ala boots on the ground) and upgrade the whole Clan to Land Raider transport. Feels pretty fluffy for the IH "in your face" playstyle.
-For friendly play ONLY I put it in a unit at the end of the document for a Clan Mobile Fortress (basically stats for a Capital Imperialis), just for shits and giggles. Think a Warlord with transport vs weapons with SC but on tracks. Not going to try to balance it, it's just for laughs. :D

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [NetEA] Iron Hands
PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 3:02 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5471
Location: London, UK
Please see my comment on the Storm Talon thread. I think they should be pairs for a minimum of 200 points - allowing 10x singltons would be OTT even if they do not get a 45cm shot; they can simply stall which I am sure is not the intention


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [NetEA] Iron Hands
PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 3:27 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 9022
Location: Manalapan, FL
I've got NO problem for them to be taken in pairs only. In fact they're WAYYY too brittle to not be IMHO. I've kept up with said thread and the general argument has centered on the 4+ vs 2x 5+ assault cannon attack which if you note, I took your approach (and then some) and kept away from 4+ AA for good reason :) Is there something I am missing here? the current stat is->
Twin Assault Cannon
15cm AP4+/AT4+/AA5+ Forward Arc

So what exactly is drawing your ire, my friend? :)

EDIT: Stupid browser cached version of thread. Now see your great comments so ignore above

As to your comment about 10x singletons, to accomplish that in a force balanced manner you'd have to have one hell of a army size in points and though do-able in a beardy way in list construction at reasonable levels, you'd probably lose bad way and is easily countered with good AA bubbles from ground support which is enabled by the points sink that the STs would cause. But it would be funny to play I'd admit. However I don't see how this is fundamentally too different than taken a buttload of TBolts when they are demonstrably way better at ground attack.

Regardless, I'm good with 2 for 200 (+25 for for typhoon on one) if that's the general consensus. The 1 or 2 is taken from general list convention for fighters, that's all. thoughts?

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: [NetEA] Iron Hands
PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 3:58 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 7:20 pm
Posts: 5471
Location: London, UK
Well, the point is that they are an activation - you could simply stand down 10 times and not use them at all (very boring, but you get the idea), so that the remainder of the army could move once the opponent is out of activations. This would be legal in the 1/3 points 'restricted' section of a 3K army - leaving you with lots of Iron Hands 'ground pounders' to play with - though admitedly it might be quite a challenge to win this way :D

To the stats, thanks for the restraint, though I still wonder about the role of the ST. If it is indeed an "Air superiority" fighter, it would seem appropriate for the Twin HB to have AA5+ (like other units) wouldn't it?
Also, just for legibility, I would change the order of the wording to place the Typhoon missile upgrade at the bottom of the stats.

Charging 25 points for the upgrade takes some of the sting out of the 45cm shot, though it is still dangerously close to setting and following precedents / power creep etc; IMO only Bombers should have 45cm range weaponry, Fighters and FBs being restricted to a maximum of 30cm irrespective of the weapon involved, which allows standardised AA weapon ranges etc. (but that is probably no surprise ;) ).


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 268 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 18  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] 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